alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* This opinion supersedes the opinion filed on October 10, 2007; that opinion has been

withdrawn as it was filed in error.

** Pursuant to 5

TH 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH CIR

. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20004*

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. RUSSELL MENZIES, also known as JOHN RUSSELL KINCAID, also known as JAMES O’SULLIVAN Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(4:05-CR-67-2)
Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: ** Defendant-Appellant Russell Menzies appeals the statutory maximum sentence of 120 months imprisonment imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession ofa firearm by a convicted felon. On appeal, Menzies advanced four claims of sentencing error: miscalculation of his Guidelines United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 12, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 06-20004

2 offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(C), based on the court’s finding that he possessed between eight and twelve firearms as a convicted felon; the sentencing court incorrectly included two prior felony convictions in calculating his base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2K1.2(a)(2) and incorrectly determined his criminal history category at IV; the sentencing court abused its discretion in rejecting his request for a downward adjustment for acceptanceofresponsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1; and the sentence imposed was unreasonable. Two months after Menzies filed his appellate brief, the government filed a motion to vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing, which a motion panel of this court ordered carried with the case on appeal. In support of its motion, the government conceded that the district court misapplied U.S.S.G. § 2K1.2(a)(2), but the government did not address the remaining charges tothedistrict court’s Guidelines calculation raised by Menzies on appeal. We have reviewed the brief s of the parties and the record on appeal, as well as thegovernment’sextensive motion tovacate and theappendices thereto, and weconclude that thegovernment’s position is principled, well reasoned, and meritorious. As both the government and Menzies seek vacatur of his sentence,
we grant the government’s motion, vacate Menzies’s sentence, and remand the case to the district court for resentencing. MOTION GRANTED; SENTENCE VACATED; CASE R EMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
#### § 304.2 Where to obtain forms and instructions.

Forms and instructions used in connection with applications, reports, and other submittals used by the FDIC can be obtained by contacting the FDIC Public Information Center (550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20429; telephone: (877) 275-3342 or (703) 562-2200), except as noted in § 304.3. In addition, many forms and instructions can be obtained from FDIC regional offices. A list of FDIC regional offices can be obtained from the FDIC Public Information Center, or found at the FDIC's website at *http://www.fdic.gov,* or in the directory of FDIC Law, Regulations, Related Acts published by the FDIC.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 292 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 292

   To amend title 4, United States Code, to add National Korean War 
  Veterans Armistice Day to the list of days on which the flag should 
                        especially be displayed.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 8, 2003

  Mrs. Kelly introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 4, United States Code, to add National Korean War 
  Veterans Armistice Day to the list of days on which the flag should 
                        especially be displayed.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

     This Act may be cited as the ``Korean War Veterans Recognition Act 
of 2003''.

SEC. 2. DISPLAY OF FLAG ON NATIONAL KOREAN WAR VETERANS ARMISTICE DAY.

     Section 6(d) of title 4, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``National Korean War Veterans Armistice Day, July 27;'' 
after ``July 4;''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,332
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  171,564
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     19,259
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               203,630
<PP&E>                                         263,382
<DEPRECIATION>                                 120,101
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 802,777
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,233,613
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    151,139
<COMMON>                                        76,452
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   802,777
<SALES>                                      1,348,009
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,348,009
<CGS>                                          571,830
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,076,868
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               953,468
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              56,143
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (356,832)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     Exhibit 23




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements of our report dated January 30, 1997, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of OM Group, Inc. included in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1996:


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Registration Number                  Description                                Filing Date
-------------------                  -----------                                -----------
<S>                      <C>                                                  <C>
33-74674                 OM Group, Inc. Long-Term Incentive Compensation
                          Plan -- Form S-8 Registration Statement --
                          1,015,625 Shares                                    January 27, 1994

333-07529                OMG Americas, Inc. Employees' Profit Sharing Plan
                          -- Form S-8 Registration Statement -- 250,000
                          Shares                                              July 3, 1996

333-07531                OM Group, Inc. Non-Employee Directors' Equity
                          Plan -- Form S-8 Registration Statement --
                          250,000 Shares                                      July 3, 1996
</TABLE>




                                                         /s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Cleveland, Ohio
March 21, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                           7,498
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,688
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,620
<PP&E>                                           2,898
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,064
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,610
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,929
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,064
<SALES>                                         16,517
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,517
<CGS>                                            6,483
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,483
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,092
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 176
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (599)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       142
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,058)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (741)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.43



FLEET BANK


August 24, 1995


Mr. Thomas A. St. Germain
Chief Financial Officer
Summa Four, Inc.
25 Sundial Avenue
Manchester, NH  03103


Dear Tom:

Reference is hereby made to the Letter Agreement (the "Agreement") executed by
and between Summa Four, Inc. and Fleet Bank of Massachusetts, N.A. as of October
15, 1992 and amended as of July 28, 1993 and August 2, 1994. We are pleased to
inform you that we have approved an extension of the Expiration from September
1, 1995 to September 1, 1996. Nothing herein shall be deemed to constitute a
waiver, release or amendment of any other terms of the agreement.

The Borrower represents and warrants that the execution of this amendment has
been duly authorized by the Borrower by all necessary corporate and other action
and that the execution will not conflict with, violate the provisions of, or
cause a default or constitute an event which, with the passage of time or giving
of notice or both, could cause a default on the part of the Borrower under its
charter documents or by-laws or under any contract, agreement, law, rule, order,
ordinance, franchise, instrument or other document, or result in the imposition
of any lien or encumbrance of any property or asset of the Borrower.

The Borrower further represents that this agreement and the attached Promissory
Note each represent legal, valid and binding obligations of the Borrower,
enforceable against the Borrower in accordance with their respective terms. In
addition, the statements, representations and warranties made in the Agreement
continue to be correct as of the date hereof and the Borrower is in compliance
with all terms of the Agreement. Except as expressly affected hereby, the
Agreement remains in full force and effect as heretofore.




<PAGE>   2


Tom, we are pleased to extend the Agreement and look forward to continuing our
relationship with Summa Four. Please sign below and execute the attached note to
evidence your acceptance of this amendment.


Sincerely,


/s/Thomas W. Davies
----------------------------
Thomas W. Davies
Vice President
High Technology Group


Agreed and Accepted: /s/ Thomas A. St. Germain                      9/28/95
                     ---------------------------------            ------------
                 by:                                                  date:
              title:
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2687

To allow beach maintenance and grooming of certain areas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 9, 2003

Mr. STUPAK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL

To allow beach maintenance and grooming of certain areas.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. BEACH GROOMING AND MAINTENANCE OF 

4 CERTAIN AREAS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with section 404(e) 

6 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 

7 1344), the Secretary of the Army, acting through the 

8 Chief of Engineers, shall conduct a rulemaking proceeding 

9 for issuance of a general permit in Michigan to allow 

10 beach maintenance and grooming for the Great Lakes 

11 Systems and Lake Saint Clair in the area below the ordi-
2

•HR 2687 IH 

1 nary high-water mark and above the water’s edge in ac2 cordance with 14 Public Act 2003, Michigan. 

3 (b) PERMITTED ACTIVITIES.—The beach mainte4 nance and grooming shall include—

5 (1) manual or mechanized leveling of sand; 

6 (2) mowing of vegetation to a height of not less 

7 than 2 inches; 

8 (3) manual or de minimis removal of vegeta9 tion; 

10 (4) construction and maintenance of a path; 

11 and 

12 (5) grooming the top 4 inches of soil in the area 

13 of Great Lakes riparian lands lying between the or14 dinary high-water mark and the water’s edge. 

15 (c) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section, the 

16 following definitions apply: 

17 (1) LEVELING OF SAND.—The term ‘‘leveling of 

18 sand’’ means the relocation of sand within areas 

19 being leveled that are predominantly free of vegeta20 tion, including the redistribution, grading, and 

21 spreading of sand that has been deposited through 

22 wind or wave action onto upland riparian property. 

23 (2) MOWING OF VEGETATION.—The term 

24 ‘‘mowing of vegetation’’ means the cutting of vegeta-
3

•HR 2687 IH 

1 tion to a height of not less than 2 inches, without 

2 disturbance of soil or plant roots. 

3 (3) REMOVAL OF VEGETATION.—The term ‘‘re4 moval of vegetation’’ means the manual or mecha5 nized removal of vegetation, other than the manual 

6 deminimis removal of vegetation. 

7 (4) GROOMING OF SOIL.—The term ‘‘grooming 

8 of soil’’ means the raking or dragging, pushing, or 

9 pulling metal teeth through the top 4 inches of soil 

10 without disturbance of or destruction to plant roots, 

11 for the purpose of removing debris. 

12 (5) PATH.—The term ‘‘path’’ means a tem13 porary access walkaway from the upland riparian 

14 property directly to the shoreline across swales with 

15 standing water, not exceeding 6 feet in bottom width 

16 and consisting of sand and pebbles obtained from 

17 the exposed, nonvegetated bottomlands or from the 

18 upland riparian property.

Æ
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements on Form S-8
(Nos. 333-153877, 333-143273, 333-137498, and 333-75811) pertaining to the 2008 Omnibus Stock and Incentive Plan for Thomas Group, Inc.,
the 2005 Omnibus Stock and Incentive Plan for Thomas Group, Inc., the Thomas Group, Inc. 401(k) Savings Plan, the 1997 Stock Option Plan of Thomas Group, Inc., the Amended and
Restated 1992 Stock Option Plan of Thomas Group, Inc. and the Amended and Restated 1988 Stock Option Plan for Thomas Group, Inc., and of our report dated March 30, 2009, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of Thomas Group, Inc. included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.

/s/ HEIN & ASSOCIATES LLP Hein & Associates LLP


Dallas,
Texas
March 30, 2009

---



QuickLinks
42676.

#### AIR SERVICE COMPANY v. COSMO INVESTMENTS, INC. et al.

*Frankum, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.*

Argued April 5, 1967

Decided April 18, 1967.

*Tarleton & Zion, John J. Tarleton,*for appellant.

*Hatcher, Meyerson, Oxford & Irvin, Henry M. Hatcher, Jr., Paul H. Pressley,*for appellees.

Debn, Judge.

Both parties agree that the only issue before us is whether *Code*§ 67-2001 gives a lessor of machinery consisting of an air compressor and drill a lien on real estate for the rental value of the machinery leased to a contractor who uses it in improving the real estate of the owner against whom the lien is sought. The statute covers, among others, “all machinists and manufacturers of machinery, including corporations engaged in such business, who may furnish or put up in any county any steam mill or other machinery, or who may repair the same.” In *Loudon v. Coleman,*59 Ga. 653, the court adopted the dictionary definition of a machinist as “a constructor of machines and engines, or one well versed in the principles of machines,” and then held that while a corporation could not answer to the latter description it could, in a general sense, to the former. Giving the statute a strict construction as we must *(Green v. Farrar Lumber Co.,*119 Ga. 30 (46 SE 62)), we are inclined to conclude both that a mere lessor of machinery to a contractor does not come within the class in favor of whom the lien is granted, nor does the machinery itself, not being something in the order of a steam mill or other mechanical device intended to be attached to and used on the realty, meet the criterion under the rule of ejusdem generis. It is generally held under applicable lien laws that machinery not, (a) totally depreciated by use on the property or, (b) incorporated into the improvement, or (c) in connection with which labor was also supplied could not be the basis of a valid lien. See 3 ALR 3d, Anno. p. 573 et seq. and cases there cited.

The trial court correctly sustained the general demurrer of the defendant Cosmo Investments, Inc.

*Judgment affirmed.*
# C_2015158EN.01001401.xml

| 13.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 158/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 158/14

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 10 November 2014

in Case E-6/14

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

v

(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2008/43/EC — Failure to implement)

(2015/C 158/08)

In Case E-6/14, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland – APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing, within the time prescribed to adopt and/or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority forthwith of all measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 5 of Chapter XXIX of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, that is Commission Directive 2008/43/EC of 4 April 2008 setting up, pursuant to Council Directive 93/15/EEC, a system for the identification and traceability of explosives for civil uses, as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and Article 7 EEA, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 10 November 2014, the operative part of which is as follows:

v

The Court hereby:

| 1. | Declares that by failing, within the time prescribed, to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 5 of Chapter XXIX of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Commission Directive 2008/43/EC of 4 April 2008 setting up, pursuant to Council Directive 93/15/EEC, a system for the identification and traceability of explosives for civil uses), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that by failing, within the time prescribed, to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 5 of Chapter XXIX of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Commission Directive 2008/43/EC of 4 April 2008 setting up, pursuant to Council Directive 93/15/EEC, a system for the identification and traceability of explosives for civil uses), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the Agreement.

| 2. | Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---
BRANDON C. GILLREATH

,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 4649

Opinion filed November 4, 2016.

Petition for Belated Appeal

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Brandon C. Gillreath, pro se , Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petit ion for belated appeal is denied as untimely. See Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(c)(5)(A).

B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
**Exhibit 13.1****Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**          Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of NatuzziS.p.A. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:          The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 of the Companyfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: June 30, 2006                               /s/ Ernesto Greco         Name: Ernesto Greco    Title: Chief Executive Officer         Dated: June 30, 2006                              /s/ Nicola V.M. Dell’Edera         Name: Nicola V.M. Dell’Edera    Title: Chief Financial Officer a.i.            The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 20-F or as a separate disclosure document.
42272.

#### UNDERCOFLER, Commissioner v. COLONIAL STORES, INC.

Per Curiam.

The Supreme Court (in *Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Undercofler,*223 Ga. 105 (153 SE2d 549)) having reversed our judgment in *Undercofler v. Colonial Stores, Inc.,*114 Ga. App. 466 (151 SE2d 794), the judgment is hereby vacated, *333and in accordance with the judgment and opinion of the Supreme Court the judgment of the trial court is

*Bell, P. J., Jordan and Eberhardt, JJ., concur.*

Decided March 2, 1967.

*Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, William L. Harper, Louis F. McDonald, Assistant Attorneys General,*for appellant.

*Kilpatrick, Cody, Rogers, McClatchey & Regenstein, George B. Haley, Jr., G. Kimbrough Taylor, Jr.,*for appellee.

*Affirmed.*