alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed, August 14, 2018

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14

- 18

- 00622

- CR

____________

STEVE SALINAS , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 119th District Court

Runnels County, Texas

Trial C ourt Cause No. 6686



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due July 30, 2018

. See Tex. R. App.

P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record.

The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record h as not

been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Audie Pritchard , the court reporter, to file the record in this appeal

within 15 days of the date of this order

.

PER CURIAM
|Exhibit 10.8(a)
|---------------

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE

AMENDED AND RESTATED SAN JOAQUIN BANCORP/ANNIS

EXECUTIVE SALARY COTINUATION AGREEMENT

WHEREAS, San Joaquin Bancorp, formerly San Joaquin Bank, (the Employer) and Stephen Annis (the Executive) entered into an Amended and
Restated Executive Salary Continuation Agreement, most recently amended and restated on June 13, 2003, (the Agreement);

WHEREAS, the Agreement provides (in Section 10.10) that the Agreement may be amended in a writing signed by each party to the Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to provide that payments to the Executive will begin on the earlier of the date the Executive attains age 65
or the date the Executive retires.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Agreement is hereby amended effective as of December 31, 2006 as follows:

1. Section 3.1 (Payments) is replaced in its entirety with the following:

Payments Upon Retirement Date.If the Executive shall remain in the continuous employment of the Employer until his Retirement Date, regardless whether the Executive continues to work past his Retirement Date, the Annual
Benefit, as defined above, shall be paid in the form of a Joint and Survivor Annuity. Each year the Annual Benefit will be paid in twelve (12) equal monthly payments on the first day of each month during the year, beginning with the month following
the Retirement Date, regardless whether the Executive continues to work past his Retirement Date.

2. A new Section 10.13 (Code Section 409A) is added as follows:

Code Section 409A.This Agreement is intended to conform to the provisions of Code Section 409A and each provision of the Agreement shall be interpreted and administered accordingly. In the event that any provision that is necessary for the
Agreement to comply with Section 409A is determined by the Committee to have been omitted, such omitted provision shall be deemed included in the Agreement and is hereby incorporation as part of the Agreement.



|Signature page to follow
|------------------------

---

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer and the Executive have executed this Agreement on December 19, 2006 in the City of Bakersfield, California.



|EMPLOYER:
|---------



|SAN JOAQUIN BANCORP
|-------------------



|By:/S/ Bruce Maclin_______________Bruce Maclin, Chairman & CEO
By:/S/ Bart Hill___________________Bart Hill, President
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|EXECUTIVE:
|----------



|
|



|
|



|/S/ Stephen M. AnnisStephen M. Annis
|------------------------------------



|
|

- 2 -

---
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-15-0000560 23-DEC-2015 09:55 AM
Exhibit 12.1  ONEBEACON INSURANCE GROUP, LTD. Computation
of Ratio of Earnings (Loss) to Fixed Charges (in
millions except ratios)  Year Ended2005
  
  2006
  
  2007
  
  2008
  
  2009Consolidated
  pre-tax income (loss) from continuing operations before equity in earnings of
  affiliate and discontinued operations
  
  $
  264.0
  
  $
  305.2
  
  $
  402.2
  
  $
  (600.6
  )
  $
  456.9Distributed
  income of equity investees
  
  
  
  70.0
  
  
  
  
  
  Interest expense
  on debt
  
  44.1
  
  45.5
  
  45.2
  
  44.9
  
  39.7Interest portion
  of rental expense
  
  11.6
  
  13.6
  
  11.1
  
  7.4
  
  7.3Earnings (loss)
  
  $
  319.7
  
  $
  434.3
  
  $
  458.5
  
  $
  (548.3
  )
  $
  503.9Interest expense
  on debt
  
  44.1
  
  45.5
  
  45.2
  
  44.9
  
  39.7Interest portion
  of rental expense
  
  11.6
  
  13.6
  
  11.1
  
  7.4
  
  7.3Fixed charges
  
  $
  55.7
  
  $
  59.1
  
  $
  56.3
  
  $
  52.3
  
  $
  47.0Ratio
  of earnings (loss) to fixed charges
  
  5.7
  
  7.3
  
  8.1
  
  (10.5
  )
  10.7
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ TRAXCELL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.
AT&T INC.,

Defendant

SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY LP, SPRINT SPECTRUM, LP, SPRINT SOLUTIONS, INC., VERIZON WIRELESS PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS, LP, Defendants

- Appellees

______________________

2023

- 1246, 2023

- 1436

______________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in No s . 2:17

- cv

- 00718

- RWS

- RSP, 2:17

- cv

- 00719

- RWS

- RSP, 2:17

- cv

- 00721

- RWS

- RSP, Judge Robert Schroeder III.

______________________
JUDGMENT

______________________
W ILLIAM P ETERSON R AMEY , III, Ramey LLP, Houston, TX, argued for plaintiff

- app ellant. Case: 23-1246 Document: 74 Page: 1 Filed: 07/13/2023B RIAN D AVID S CHMALZBACH , McGuireWoods LLP, Richmond, VA, argued for all defendants

- appellees. Defendants

- appellees Sprint Communications Company LP,Sprint Spectrum, LP, Sprint Solutions, Inc. also represented by D AVID E VAN F INKELSON ; T YLER V AN H OUTAN , Houston, TX.

J ACOB K EVIN B ARON , Holland & Knight LLP, Boston, MA, for defendant

- appellee Verizon Wireless Personal Communications, LP. Also represented by J OSHUA C. K RUMHOLZ , A LLISON L UCIER

.

______________________
T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (P ROST , H UGHES , and C UNNINGHAM , Circuit Judges ).
AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

July 13, 2023 Date /s/ Jar r ett B. Perlow Jar rett B. Perlow Clerk of Court Case: 23-1246 Document: 74 Page: 2 Filed: 07/13/2023
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         199,157
<SECURITIES>                                    77,017
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,606
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,504
<INVENTORY>                                     14,604
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               322,768
<PP&E>                                          24,510
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,919
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 349,726
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,240
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       356,766
<OTHER-SE>                                     (43,280)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   349,726
<SALES>                                         52,896
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                52,896
<CGS>                                           21,049
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,049
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                40,565
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   225
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   4
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (204)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (284)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (488)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (488)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.02)


</TABLE>
#### §§ 2104.104-2104.109 [Reserved]
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Russell J. Howard, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge the Quarterly Report of Maxygen, Inc.
on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Maxygen, Inc.



By:

/s/ Russell J. HowardName:

Russell J. HowardTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDate:

May 8, 2006


I, Lawrence W. Briscoe, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge the Quarterly Report of Maxygen, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Maxygen, Inc.



By:

/s/ Lawrence W. BriscoeName:

Lawrence W. BriscoeTitle:

Chief Financial OfficerDate:

May 8, 2006
§ 235.66 Sources of State funds. ( a ) *Public funds.* Public funds may be considered as the State's share in claiming Federal reimbursement where the funds: ( 1 ) Are appropriated directly to the State or local agency, or transferred from another public agency (including Indian tribes) to the State or local agency and under its administrative control, or certified by the contributing public agency as representing expenditures eligible for FFP under §§ 235.60-235.66;
( 2 ) Are not used to match other Federal funds; and
( 3 ) Are not federal funds, or are Federal funds authorized by Federal law to be used to match other Federal funds.
( b ) *Private funds.* Funds donated from private sources may be considered as the State's share in claiming Federal reimbursement only where the funds are: ( 1 ) Transferred to the State or local agency and under its administrative control;
( 2 ) Donated without any restriction which would require their use for the training of a particular individual or at particular facilities or institutions; and
( 3 ) Do not revert to the donor's facility or use.
[45 FR 29835, May 6, 1980]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2013

JIA JIA WANG,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A77-993-866)

Submitted: February 16, 2005 Decided: March 16, 2005

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed in part; denied in part by unpublished per

curiam opinion.

Henry Zhang, ZHANG & ASSOCIATES, P.C., New York, New York, for

Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, James A.

Hunolt, Senior Litigation Counsel, Paul E. O’Brien, Office of

Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jia Jia Wang, a native and citizen of China, petitions

for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board)

affirming the immigration judge’s denial of his application for

asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention

Against Torture.

Wang first challenges the immigration judge’s finding

that his asylum application was untimely filed with no showing of

changed or extraordinary circumstances excusing the late filing.

See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B) (2000); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4), (5)

(2004). We conclude we lack jurisdiction to review this claim.

See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3) (2000).

Wang next argues that the immigration judge violated his

due process rights by not raising the timeliness of his application

before rendering her decision. We have reviewed the administrative

record and conclude Wang did not exhaust his administrative

remedies with respect to this issue because he did not raise it in

his appeal to the Board. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2000);

Asika v. Ashcroft, 362 F.3d 264, 267 n.3 (4th Cir. 2004).

While we do not have jurisdiction to consider the Board’s

denial of Wang’s asylum claim, we retain jurisdiction to consider

the denial of his request for withholding of removal, which is not

subject to the one-year time limitation. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)

(2004). “To qualify for withholding of removal, a petitioner must
*We note that Wang asserts no specific allegation of error

committed below in denying relief under the Convention Against

Torture.

- 3 -

show that he faces a clear probability of persecution because of

his race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social

group, or political opinion.” Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 324 n.13

(4th Cir. 2002) (citing INS v. Stevic, 467 U.S. 407, 430 (1984)).

Based on our review of the record, we conclude substantial evidence

supports the finding that Wang has failed to meet this standard.

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review in part

and deny it in part.* 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.

PETITION DISMISSED IN PART;

DENIED IN PART
#### § 1233.13 May the Director waive any provision of these regulations?

In an emergency, the Director may waive any provision of these regulations.
I,
      E.
      Todd Whittemore, certify that:





1.
      I have
      reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to
      be
      filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Lehman
      XS
      Trust 2006-11 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);





2.
      Based
      on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information
      required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report
      is
      included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;





4.
      I am
      responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicers and based
      on
      my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer
      compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation
      AB,
      and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers
      have
      fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material
      respects; and





5.
      All of
      the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
      securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance
      with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included
      in
      this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act
      Rules
      13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as
      otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
      described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
      10-K.





In
      giving
      the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided
      to me
      by the following unaffiliated parties: LaSalle Bank National Association, as
      Trustee, paying agent and Custodian, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company,
      as Custodian, US Bank National Association, as Custodian, Wells Fargo Bank,
      National Association, as Custodian, First American Real
      Estate Solutions of Texas, L.P., as sub-contractor for Aurora Loan Services
      LLC, Newport Management Corporation, as sub-contractor for Aurora Loan Services
      LLC, IndyMac Bank, FSB, as servicer, Newport Management Corporation, as
      sub-contractor for IndyMac Bank, FSB and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company,
      as sub-contractor for IndyMac Bank, FSB.





Dated:
      March 29, 2007





/s/
      E.
      Todd Whittemore


By:
      E.
      Todd Whittemore


Title
      Executive Vice President
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsHopf bifurcation in the driven cavityIncompressible two dimensional calculations are reported for the impulsively started lid driven cavity with aspect ratio two. The algorithm is based on the time dependent streamfunction equation, with a Crank-Nicolson differencing scheme for the diffusion terms, and with an Adams-Bashforth scheme for the convection terms. A multigrid method is used to solve the linear implicit equations at each time step. Periodic asymptotic solutions have been found for Re = 10000 and for Re = 5000. The Re = 5000 results are validated by grid refinement calculations. The solutions are shown to be precisely periodic, and care is taken to demonstrate that asymptotic states were reached. A discussion is included about the indicators that are used to show that an asymptotic state was reached, and to show that the asymptotic state is indeed periodic.Document ID19900002653Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsGoodrich, John W.*(Colorado Univ. Boulder., United States)*Gustafson, Karl*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Halasi, Kadosa*(Kansas State Univ. Manhattan., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 1989Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And Heat TransferReport/Patent NumberICOMP-89-21E-4957-1NAS 1.15:102334NASA-TM-102334Accession Number90N11969Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NASA ORDER C-99066-GPROJECT: RTOP 505-62-21Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900002653.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-385V

Filed: June 17, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

PATRICIA GARCIA,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA)

Bruce William Slane, Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., White Plains, NY, for 

petitioner.

Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On March 13, 2018, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2

(the 

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to 

Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received

on January 4, 2017. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On June 10, 2019, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

 

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This 

means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine 

Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the 

disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned 

agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from 

public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this 

case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in 

accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management 

and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.
2

at 1. Specifically, respondent states that “petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites 

for compensation under the Vaccine Act.” Id. at 4 (citing 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-13(a)(1)(B); 

42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(i)).

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
### ATTACHEMENT E HEARINGCERTIFICATION This certifies in accordance with the provisions of Title 40Code of Federal Regulations Part 51 .102 that the following actions were taken regarding the adoption of R .C.S .A. section 22a-174- 36b: 1) The public hearing was held on May 7, 2004 as announced in the notice of hearing (copy attached) ; 2) In accordance with the notice, materials were available for reviewin each Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) in Connecticut; 3) Copies of the notice were mailed to the directors of the air pollution control agencies in New York, New

Jersey, Rhode Island and Massachusetts along with a copy to the Director of the Air Management Division of Region I of the U .S
. Environmental Protection Agency; and 4) The notice of hearing was published in newspapers as follows: Newspaper Connecticut Law

Journal Connecticut Post (Bridgeport) Hartford Courant New London Day The Register Citizen (Torrington) 

# ,N-.~ (~, 2~~d q .r~aY.e- Date AQCR Date March 30, 2004 43 March 30, 2004 42 March 30, 2004 41 March 30, 2004 44 March 30, 2004

Paul Farrell Bureau ofAir Management
BILLING CODE: 6715-01-M

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meetings

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION NOTICE OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:

89 FR 3402

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING:

TUESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2024 AT 1:00 P.M. AND ITS CONTINUATION AT THE 

CONCLUSION OF THE OPEN MEETING ON JANUARY 25, 2024

CHANGES IN THE MEETING:

The meeting will begin at 10:00 A.M. on January 23, 2024.

* * * * * *

CONTACT FOR MORE INFORMATION: Judith Ingram, Press Officer

Telephone: (202) 694-1220

(Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b)

Vicktoria J. Allen

Deputy Secretary of the Commission

Submitted: January 18, 2024