alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### HCFC IFR Lee, Amanda I. t o : Luke Hall-Jordan 05/13/2011 04:48 PM Cc: Drusilla Hufford, David Donaldson 

### State Department has no substantive comment. Thanks and have a good weekend.
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 303

Authorizing the President of the Senate, the President of the Senate pro

tempore, and the Majority and Minority Leaders to make certain appointments during the recess or adjournment of the present session.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 15 (legislative day, OCTOBER 2), 1998

Mr. LOTT submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed

to

RESOLUTION

Authorizing the President of the Senate, the President of

the Senate pro tempore, and the Majority and Minority

Leaders to make certain appointments during the recess

or adjournment of the present session.

1 Resolved, That during the recess or adjournment of

2 the present session of the Senate, the President of the

3 Senate, the President of the Senate pro tempore, the Ma4 jority Leader of the Senate, and the Minority Leader of

5 the Senate be, and they are hereby authorized to make

6 appointments to commissions, committees, boards, con7 ferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by
2

SRES 303 ATS

1 law, by concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order

2 of the Senate.

Æ
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10.26


The following agreement was entered into by the Company with, among others, John
E. Hagale Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and one other
executive officer, on August 5, 1999.







<PAGE>   2


You were a participant in the Burlington Resources Inc. ("BR") Retention Plan
that was adopted effective March 1, 1992 (the "Retention Plan"). The Retention
Plan offered certain benefits, including a pension enhancement, to those
individuals who were employed at BR's Seattle holding company office on January
1, 1992. In connection with your relocation from Seattle to Houston, you were
asked to sign a waiver of your benefits under the Retention Plan. As you may
know, BR has paid a similar pension enhancement to former eligible BR employees
who relocated from Seattle to Houston, even though they had executed such
waivers. Under these circumstances, it would be inequitable not to treat you
similarly.

The purpose of this letter is to confirm that, upon termination of your
employment and execution by you of BR's customary severance agreement, you will
be paid a lump sum pension enhancement that results from the following
modifications to the provisions of BR's Pension Plan (the "Qualified Plan") and
Supplemental Benefits Plan (the "Supplemental Plan") in effect on the date
hereof:

o    The "Lump Sum" calculation assumes you are eligible for and commence early
     retirement benefits, including the early retirement supplement, at age 60;
o    "Final Average Earnings" at age 60 assumes your base salary increases 6%
     per year and you receive your maximum bonus opportunity each year; and
o    "Integration Level" at age 60 assumes the Social Security Wage Base
     increases 5% per year.

The Lump Sum described above will be determined using the actuarial assumptions
being used at the time of such payment with respect to the Qualified Plan (for
example, the discount rate and mortality assumptions) and will be reduced by the
lump sum value of benefits payable from the Qualified Plan and Supplemental Plan
whether or not such benefits are payable in a lump sum.

                                         BURLINGTON RESOURCES INC.


                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         By:  Bobby S. Shackouls
                                         Its:  Chairman of the Board, President
                                                 and Chief Executive Officer
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellant,

v.

MARTIN E. O’BOYLE,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-2662

[July 21, 2022]

Appeal from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Ashley C. Zuckerman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2015-MM012872-AXXX-SB.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sorraya M. SolagesJones, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Fred Haddad of Fred Haddad, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

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

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7628

JEFFREY T. LAWSON, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. EMPLOYEES OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; V. S. GRAY; O. CHAMBERS; GAIL JONES; MS. MATTHEWS; MRS. FOSTER, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:09-cv-00258-jct-mfu)

Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 22, 2009

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey T. Lawson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jeffrey T. Lawson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Lawson v. Employees of Virginia Dep’t of Corr. , No. 7:09-cv-00258-jct-mfu (W.D. Va. Aug. 26, 2009). 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
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT JUNE 5, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H]

I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 15694 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 6 0 0 3 9 - CR- W PD U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s T H E O D I S J O N E S , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( Ju n e 5, 2008) B efo re T JO F L A T , A N D E R S O N an dH U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: P hi l i p L . R e i z e ns t e i n, appoi nt e d c ouns e l f orT he odi s J one s , ha s f

i l e d a m ot i on t o w i thdr a w on appe a l s upport e d byabr i e f pr e pa r e d pur s ua ntt o A nde r s v.2

C a l i f orni a , 386 U . S . 738, 87 S . C t . 1396, 18 L . E d. 2d 493 ( 1967) . O uri nde pe nde nt r e vi e w of

the e nt i r e r e c or d r e ve a l s tha tc ouns e l ’ s a s s e s s m e ntof the r e l a t i ve m e r i tof th e ap p e a l is c o rr e c t. B e c au s e in d e p e n d e n t e x a m in a tio n o f th e e n tir e r e c o r dr e v e a ls n o arg u ab l e i ssu es o f m eri t , co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , a nd the d i stri ctco u rt ’ s d en i al o f Jo n es’ s m o t i o n t o red u ce h i s sen t en ce i s A FFI R M ED .
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
 
     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
of our report dated February 12, 1998 on the consolidated financial statements
and financial statement schedule of ITT Corporation, and our report dated March
11, 1998 on the combined financial statements of Westin Hotels & Resorts
Worldwide, Inc. and the consolidated financial statements of W&S Hotel L.L.C.
included in this Form 8-K, into the Company's previously filed Registration
Statement on Form S-3 File Nos. 333-40077, 333-40077-01, 333-47639,
333-47639-01, 333-49953, 333-49953-01, 333-49955, 333-49955-01, 333-13411,
333-13411-01, 33-64335 and 33-64335-01) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-49927,
333-49927-01, 333-49931, 333-49931-01, 333-02721, and 333-02721-01).
 
                                                             ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
New York, New York
April 24, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                           8,296
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   47,383
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     54,322
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               115,277
<PP&E>                                          22,507
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,326
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 137,715
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           67,581
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                      48,970
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   137,715
<SALES>                                         77,244
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                91,920
<CGS>                                           54,096
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   65,566
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,443
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,261
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,966
<INCOME-TAX>                                       713
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,253
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,253
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
No. 58316.

protest 197849-K (Tampa).

#### Herbert B. Moller *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It was stipulated that the items of merchandise are not printing presses and are not designed for use nor principally used in business offices, but rather are designed for use and are principally used in printing establishments, citing Abstract 55564. Upon the uncontroverted facts, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Circuit Court for Baltimore City 

Case No. 24-D-15-002928 

Argued: Friday, November 30, 2018 

 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

OF MARYLAND 

 No. 27 

 September Term, 2018 

 

CELSO MONTERROSO ROMERO 

 v. 

 JOSEFA PEREZ 

 

 

Barbera, C.J. 

Greene 

McDonald 

Watts 

Hotten 

Getty 

Adkins, Sally D., 

 (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned) 

 JJ. 

 Per Curiam Order 

 

Filed: December 7, 2018 
CELSO MONTERROSO ROMERO * IN THE 

 * COURT OF APPEALS 

 v. * OF MARYLAND 

 * No. 27 

JOSEFA PEREZ * September Term, 2018 

PER CURIAM ORDER 

 For reasons to be stated later in an opinion to be filed, it is this 7th day of December 2018, 

 ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that the April 4, 2018, judgment of the 

Court of Special Appeals, Romero v. Perez, 236 Md. App. 503, be reversed; and it is further 

 ORDERED, that this case be remanded to the Court of Special Appeals with the instruction 

that the October 7, 2016, order of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Docket Entry No. 2001, be 

vacated and, further, that the case be remanded to the Circuit Court to enter forthwith an amended 

order that includes the requisite Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (“SIJS”) finding that R.P.’s 

reunification with his mother is not viable due to the unrefuted evidence of neglect presented to 

the Circuit Court; and it is further 

 ORDERED, that, in satisfying this order, the Court of Special Appeals and the Circuit 

Court for Baltimore City shall be mindful of the imminent deadline of May 2, 2019, for timely 

submission of R.P.’s SIJS application and shall make all reasonable efforts to execute the Mandate 

of this Court as expeditiously as possible. All costs are waived. Mandate to issue forthwith. 

 /s/ Mary Ellen Barbera 

 Chief Judge
# Cover Sheet

Using the Provided Shocks Risk factor shocks are provided here in a format that is analogous to that of the FR Y-14Q schedule for Trading, Private Equity and Other Fair Value Assets. It is expected that firms will apply these risk factor shocks to produce the profit and loss (P/L) estimates for the trading and counterparty credit (CCR) portfolios.  In cases in which the specified shocks are not directly compatible with the firm’s internal systems, the firm is expected to interpolate or extrapolate around the given points to determine the appropriate shock.   Supporting documentation should include a description of the methods used to interpolate or extrapolate. In cases where there are nonlinearities, firms should not simply multiply their exposures by the corresponding shocks to arrive at a purely linear P/L estimate, but should instead use full-revaluation methods to compute their loss estimates.   Using Other Shocks If firms require a shock that has not been provided, then firms should use their best judgment to generate the missing shock so that it is sensible  given shocks for related instruments and the scenario narrative.   Any such cases must be described thoroughly in supplemental documentation to be submitted with firm’s loss estimates.  

# Equity by Geography

# Dividends

# FX Spot

# FX Vega

# Rates DV01

# Rates Vega-Normal & Relative

# Rates Vega-Normal & Absolute

# Other Rates

# Energy

# Metals

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Ags & Softs

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Commodity Indices

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Securitized Products

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Agencies

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Munis

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# ARS

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Corporate Credit-Advanced

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Corporate Credit-EM

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Sovereign Credit

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Credit Correlation

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Private Equity

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#		

# Other Fair Value Assets

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // FRSONLY&1#
# Official Journal L 196/2017

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 196 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6027 July 2017 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 196

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6027 July 2017

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS |
| | * | Council Decision (EU) 2017/1368 of 11 May 2017 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, and provisional application of the Third Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union | 1 |
| | * | Third Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union | 3 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

*

Council Decision (EU) 2017/1368 of 11 May 2017 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, and provisional application of the Third Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union

1

*

Third Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union

3

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Before the Second Division,

February 11, 1953

No. 57076.

protests 111843-K, etc. (Buffalo).

#### C. J. Tower & Sons *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of abrasive sludge similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *C. J. Tower & Sons*(40 C. C. P. A. 14, C. A. D. 491), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1664 was sustained.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT

TO 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted
Pursuant to

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SafeStitch Medical, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter
ended June 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James J. Martin, Chief Financial 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 2002that:



|(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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ James J. MartinJames J. MartinChief Financial OfficerAugust 14, 2012
CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
      connection with the annually  report of Cancer
      Therapeutics,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the
      period  ending  February 28, 2007 as filed with
      the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
      date hereof (the "Periodic Report"),  I,  Chene
      Gardner,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the
      Company,  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
            The
                Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of the
                Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and





(2)
            The
                information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in
                all
                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
                of
                the Company.





Dated
      as of April 16, 2007





By       /s/
      Chene Gardner


----------------------------------


Chene
      Gardner


Chief
      Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-18-00020-CR

EX PARTE

GREGARY A. TURNER, SR.

----------

FROM THE 213TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. D213W010816-1343101-A

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Appellant Gregary A. Turner, Sr. attempts to appeal either a second time 

from the trial court’s 2013 judgment or from the Texas Court of Criminal 

Appeals’s February 2017 summary denial of his postconviction application for 

writ of habeas corpus, see Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (West 2015).

Either way, we have no jurisdiction over this appeal.

 1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

This court’s opinion and judgment of August 13, 2015 resolved Appellant’s 

direct appeal from the trial court’s October 2013 judgment. Turner v. State, No. 

02-13-00487-CR, 2015 WL 4775758, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Aug. 13, 

2015, pet. dism’d, untimely filed) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Our

plenary power expired sixty days after our judgment’s date. See Tex. R. App. P. 

19.1(a). To the extent Appellant seeks another appeal of his October 

2013 conviction and sentence, we have no jurisdiction to consider the appeal, 

both because our plenary power has expired and because his notice of appeal, 

filed more than four years too late, is untimely. See Tex. R. App. 19.3, 26.2(a); 

Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); cf. Coleman v. 

State, No. 03-11-00648-CR, 2011 WL 6118604, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 8, 

2011, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (“He is not entitled to a 

second appeal of this conviction.”).

To the extent Appellant seeks to appeal from the Texas Court of Criminal 

Appeals’s February 2017 denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus, this 

court has no authority to review a decision of the Texas Court of Criminal 

Appeals. State ex rel. Wilson v. Briggs, 171 Tex. Crim. 479, 351 S.W.2d 892, 

894 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961) (“The Court of Criminal Appeals is the court of last 

resort in this state in criminal matters. This being so, no other court of this state 

has authority to overrule or circumvent its decisions, or disobey its mandates.”); 

cf. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07, § 5 (“After conviction the procedure 

outlined in this Act shall be exclusive and any other proceeding shall be void and 
3

of no force and effect in discharging the prisoner.”); Ater v. Eighth Court of 

Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (orig. proceeding) (holding 

that the court of appeals usurped the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’s

exclusive authority to grant habeas relief from a final felony conviction).

Appellant’s response to our letter expressing our jurisdictional concerns

does not provide a basis for continuing the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this 

appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: PITTMAN, J.; SUDDERTH, C.J.; and BIRDWELL, J.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: April 12, 2018