alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 8, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50273 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ERIK OMAR ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CR-628-ALL

-------------------- Before KING, GARWOOD, and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Erik Omar Estrada raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 12(A)

                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                  SALTON, INC.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                             39 WEEKS                                   YEAR ENDED
                                           ENDED 3/31/01
(THOUSANDS, EXCEPT RATIOS)                  (UNAUDITED)        2000          1999          1998          1997          1996
--------------------------                 -------------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
<S>                                        <C>              <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>
Fixed Charges

  Interest and amortization of debt
  issuance costs on all indebtedness        $     28,738    $   31,102    $   15,864    $    7,336    $    4,967    $    3,934

  Add interest element implicit in
  rentals                                          2,804         1,923         1,158           521           394           222
                                            ------------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
       Total fixed charges                  $     31,542    $   33,025    $   17,022    $    7,857    $    5,361    $    4,156

Income
  Income before income taxes                $     92,104    $  146,903    $   53,863    $   32,186    $    6,400    $    1,146
  Add fixed charges                               31,542        33,025        17,022         7,857         5,361         4,156
                                            ------------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
  Income before fixed charges and
  income taxes                              $    123,646    $  179,928    $   70,885    $   40,043    $   11,761    $    5,302
                                            ============    ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                  3.92          5.45          4.16          5.10          2.19          1.28
</TABLE>
_________________________________________ 

 

Order 

June 26, 2007 

133439 

133440 

AMERICAN AXLE & 

MANUFACTURING, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v 

MARK ALLEN MURDOCK, 

 Defendant-Appellant, 

and 

JUANITA DENISE MURDOCK,

 Defendant.
 

_________________________________________/ 

Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

 SC: 133439, 133440 

 COA: 262786, 265111 

Wayne CC: 03-320706-CZ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 19, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

l0618 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

June 26, 2007 

 Clerk
Docket i'o. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD 

I 

With whom outside the FAA hasthis AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approva ll--ol c,., --·-~ 

manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)'? ---·--------___; 

! ORGANIZATTOI\ I PERSON CONTACTED DATE I TOPICS DISCUSSED I 

DAH ' William Enk Various conversations Concur. 

I Kelly 'Nard between 12-12-14 

thru 2/3/ 15 

I 

I 

Other. List below. I r- I 

I I I 

! 

r--t----t---1 --t----~ 

__ __J,_I ---~---- ------~ Other/ Additional Information:
<PAGE>
                               AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

         This Amendment No. 2 to Employment Agreement is made as of the 22nd day
of January, 2004, by and between Stewart Enterprises, Inc., a Louisiana
corporation (the "Company"), and William E. Rowe (the "Employee").

                                   WITNESSETH:

         WHEREAS, the Company has entered into an Employment Agreement with the
Employee dated as of November 1, 2001 as amended by Amendment No.1 dated as of
April 1, 2002 (as amended, the "Employment Agreement"); and

         WHEREAS, the Company, acting through the Compensation Committee of the
Board of Directors, and the Employee have agreed to an extension of the term of
the Employment Agreement, as set forth herein.

         NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the continued employment of
Employee by the Company and the payment of wages, salary and other compensation
to Employee by the Company, the parties hereto agree as follows:

         SECTION 1. Except as expressly amended herein, all of the terms and
provisions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

         SECTION 2. Article I, Section 2 of the Employment Agreement is hereby
amended to read in its entirety as follows:

                  EMPLOYMENT TERM. The Term of this Agreement (the "Employment
         Term") shall commence on the Agreement Date and shall continue through
         October 31, 2006, subject to any earlier termination of Employee's
         status as an employee pursuant to this Agreement.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
duly executed and signed as of the date indicated above.

                                            STEWART ENTERPRISES, INC.


                                            By: /S/ JAMES W.MCFARLAND
                                                --------------------------------
                                                      James W. McFarland
                                                Compensation Committee Chairman

                                            EMPLOYEE:

                                            /S/ WILLIAM E. ROWE
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                       William E. Rowe
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-83,157-01

EX PARTE JOEL JOHNATHON LOPEZ-BARRAZA, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1172883-A IN THE 177TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of a

controlled substance and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction.

Applicant contends that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because, among other

things, she failed to file a motion to suppress and to explain Applicant’s options to him before he

pleaded guilty. 
2

Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these

circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294

(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court

shall order trial counsel to respond to the above claims. The trial court may use any means set out

in TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d).

Applicant appears to be represented by counsel. If he is not and the trial court elects to hold

a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wishes to

be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to represent him at the hearing. 

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. 

The trial court shall make findings of fact as to whether removal proceedings have been

initiated for Applicant and, if so, he is removable solely because of the present conviction. The trial

court shall also determine whether counsel’s conduct was deficient and there is a reasonable

probability that Applicant would have insisted on a trial but for her conduct. See Hill v. Lockhart,

474 U.S. 52 (1985). The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and conclusions of law

that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for habeas corpus

relief.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or
3

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time shall

be obtained from this Court. 

Filed: May 13, 2015

Do not publish
Before the Second Division,

May 9, 1963

No. 67713.

#### James S. Baker (Imports) Co., Inc., and H. H. Elder & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 61/11203, etc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of crowbars similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *National Carloading Corp. et al.*(48 CCPA 70, C.A.D. 767), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JORGE GUERRA-ESPARZA,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-10470

D.C. No. 2:11-cr-01947-ROS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 21, 2014** 

Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Jorge Guerra-Esparza appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction

for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 846; and possession with intent to distribute cocaine and aiding and abetting, in

FILED

JAN 24 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A)(ii), and 18 U.S.C. § 2. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Guerra-Esparza contends that the district court committed legal error when it

denied him safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f). Notwithstanding the

court’s alleged misstatements regarding the requirements for obtaining safetyvalve relief, the record reflects that the court agreed with the government’s

determination that Guerra-Esparza had not truthfully and fully provided the

government with all of the information he had concerning the offense. Because the

record supports this determination, the district court did not clearly err in denying

relief. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5); United Mejia-Pimental, 477 F.3d 1100, 1103

(9th Cir. 2007).

Because the district court lacked discretion to sentence Guerra-Esparza

below the statutory mandatory minimum, we do not reach his remaining

contentions of sentencing error.

Guerra-Esparza’s stipulated motion to supplement the record is granted. 

AFFIRMED.

2 12-10470
No. 57137.

protests 934175-G, etc. (New York).

#### Prime Fur Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the kidskin plates are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kung Chen Fur Corpn.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 266, C. D. 1480), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

Ford, J., concurred.

Mollison, J., dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1480, *supra.*
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF THECHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF TUESDAY MORNING CORPORATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350

 

I, Stephanie Bowman, the Chief Financial Officer ofTuesday Morning Corporation, hereby certify that:

 

1.             The quarterly report on Form 10-Q ofTuesday Morning Corporation for the period ended March 31, 2010 fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.             The information contained in theabove-mentioned report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of Tuesday Morning Corporation.

 

 
| Date: April 30, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Stephanie Bowman                       |
|---------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                      |   | Stephanie Bowman   Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
No. 56897.

#### C. S. Allen Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 171656-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that the subject of *C. S. Allen Corp.*v. *United States*(38 C. C. P. A. 48, C. A. D. 438), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# L_2022147EN.01005301.xml

| 30.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 147/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 147/53

---

Corrigendum to Rules of Procedure of the European Economic and Social Committee – May 2022

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 140 of 19 May 2022
  )

This publication should be considered null and void.

---
No. 59890.

#### Air Express Int’l Agency, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 260735-35 (New York).

*423Opinion by

J ohnson, J.

It was stipulated that if the statement of the American manufacturer had been filed prior to the liquidation of the entry or the expiration of the collector’s review period under section 515, the certificate of exportation would have been waived and the entry liquidated free of duty as American goods returned. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following Abstract 47521, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the Second Division,

January 22, 1947

No. 51534.

#### Protests 93538-K, etc., of C. R. Bard, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of catheters and similar articles composed in chief value of synthetic gum the same in all material respects as the merchandise the classification of which was involved in *Bard*v. *United States*(T. D. 49189) and *Bard*v. *United States*(2 Cust. Ct. 244, C. D. 134). In accordance therewith the claim at 20 percent under paragraph 1558 was sustained.
QCB Change in Control Agreement Renewal and Extension - Kathryn M. Hannigan



 Exhibit 10.9.9 
  
 Quaker City Bank Change in Control Agreement Renewal and Extension Acknowledgment between Quaker City Bank and Kathryn M. Hennigan dated July 1, 2003.

  
 QUAKER CITY BANK 
 CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT 
 RENEWAL AND EXTENSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 
  
 Name of Participant:    Kathryn
M. Hennigan 
  
 The undersigned participant does hereby acknowledge that, at
their regularly scheduled meeting on June 19, 2003, the Board of Directors of Quaker City Bank acted to renew and extend the Quaker City Bank Change in Control Agreement with the undersigned participant to a full twenty-four (24) month term, until
June 30, 2005. 
  
 Dated this
            1st             day of
            July            , A.D.,
            2003            . 
  

	 	 	       QUAKER CITY BANK

			
	             /s/    KATHRYN M.
HENNIGAN

	 	 By:
	 	             /s/    FREDERIC R. MCGILL


	 Participant
	 	 	 	President
Exhibit 18.1





March 25, 2011





To the Board of Directors and


Stockholders of Cyalume Technologies Holdings, Inc.





As stated in the notes to the consolidated financial statements of Cyalume Technologies Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiary (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company changed the date of its annual goodwill and intangible asset impairment tests from December 31st to August 31st. Management believes that the accounting change is preferable in the circumstances because it will allow the Company more time to accurately complete its impairment testing process in order to incorporate the results in its annual financial statements and timely file those statements with the Securities Exchange Commission in accordance with its filing
requirements.  We have reviewed and discussed with management the circumstances, business judgment, and planning that formed the basis for making this change in accounting principle.





It should be recognized that professional standards have not been established for selecting among alternative principles that exist in this area or for evaluating the preferability of alternative accounting principles. Accordingly, we are furnishing this letter solely for purposes of the Company’s compliance with the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and it should not be used or relied on for any other purpose.





Based on our review and discussion, we concur with management’s judgment that the newly adopted accounting principle is preferable in the circumstances. In formulating this position, we are relying on management’s business planning and judgment, which we do not find unreasonable.





Very truly yours,





/s/ CCR LLP





Glastonbury, Connecticut
No. P68/81.

protests 61/22242 and 66/5686 (New York).

#### Global Gifts & Gadgets, Inc., and Grand Basket Co. *v.*United States,

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of rattancore sleds, trays, and other rattancore articles similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Royal Cathay Trading Co. et al.*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 371, C.D. 2662), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 55764.

protests 151988-K and 151989-K (Portland, Oreg.).

#### Frank P. Dow Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Protocols and Controls 

Safety for public on the ground as well as manned aircraft above is an essential and utmost consideration 

for aerial videos and photography. As such, safety protocols and controls must be implemented through 

pre-flight preparation and during flight. 

Pre-Flight Protocol: 

• Check batteries with voltage meter to insure fully charged and ready for use.

• Inspect batteries for damage or leakage that may affect proper operation.

• Inspect propellers for cracks, chips or damage that may cause sudden loss of propulsion or 

unmanageable/uncontrolled flight.

• Check weather forecasts for wind advisory or other conditions that my impact flight.

• Consult five (5) mile radius map for airport vicinity. 

o Contact respective airport to advise of estimated flight time, estimated flight duration, estimated 

elevation of flight, and any other pertinent information. 

• Inspect flight area for vicinity of public safety helipads/heliports

o vicinity of medical helipads/heliports

o vicinity of light poles

o vicinity or utility wires

o vicinity of trees

o flocks of birds that may cause interference and potential flight impact

o vicinity of any elevated obstructions that may pose potential flight hazard o vicinity of roadways 

with moderate to heavy traffic that can be distracted o public gatherings that may attract viewers

o optional point of control for best visual site of UAS while in flight 

• Takeoff and landing

o inspect area for best and safest point of takeoff and landing

o if in a subdivision or area that is within 150 feet of a residential street, post warning sign(s)/stand(s) 

*Attention Aerial Photography In Progress - Remain Back 150 Feet " 

Flight Protocol: 

• takeoff and land from same location

• remain alert to birds, aircraft, curious public, and approaching vehicles

• do not allow anyone to engage in conversation or distract the remote control pilot 

• restrict flight to minimal elevation sufficient to acquire desired results

• remained prepared for emergency landing at all times

• pay attention to flight time 

o if possible set a timer as a safety alert land UAS and shut down propulsion immediately following 

landing
Project# Sponsor Street DescriptionProjectLengthNOXEmissionReductions(tons/day)CostEffectiveness($/ton)AcceptanceofBidCompletionDateConfirmedCompletion(Y/N) 2013ProjectUpdate(s)0912‐72‐145GreaterSoutheastManagementDistrict HolmanPedestrianImprovements .11Miles 0.0001862 $253,871.0012/1/2009 5/1/2010 Y0912‐72‐146GreaterSoutheastManagementDistrictElgin,Ennis,AlabamaPedestrianImprovements .19Miles 0.0004562 $172,066.0012/1/2009 5/1/2010 Y0912‐72‐147UptownHoustonAssociation WestheimerPedestrian/TransitImprovementProgram 1.75Miles 0.0137628 $85,027.009/1/2007 6/1/201050%CompleteUptownWestheimerproject,includingstreetscapeimprovements.PedestrianimprovementshavebeencompletedonWestheimerPh1,UptownParkBlvdandSkylark.asofDec2012JerdoncontracthasstartedworkonWestheimerPh2anditisabout40%complete.WorkonWestheimerandRichmondapprox.50%completeforbothstreets(JerdonContract).Anticipatedcompletionbyendof2013.TheColumbiaTapTrailnowconnectstheareaeastoftheSIPRevisionTable1PROJECTSWITHAPPLICABLEBENEFITSSTATEIMPLEMENTATIONPLANHOUSTON‐GALVESTON‐BRAZORIAAREATRANSITENHANCEMENTS(BUS).RFP/IFBIssued:9/30/2010.ContractAward:10/14/2010.ContractComplete:1/7/2013.0912‐71‐544CityofHoustonColumbiaTapRailtoTrail 3.11Miles 0.0002721 $4,376,248.002/9/2007 CompleteYTheColumbiaTapTrailnowconnectstheareaeastoftheGeorgeR.BrownConventionCenter(PolkSt)totheThirdWard(DixieDrive).Thecompletedportionsofthebikewayprojectareover4milesinlength.Anadditionalsegment(MacGregortoEofSH288)isanticipatedtobecompletedin2013.http://offcite.org/2009/03/12/rail‐to‐trail‐celebrating‐columbia‐tap0912‐71‐801CityofHoustonColumbiaTapUnionStationTrail12'WideConcreteSharedUsePathwith5'BikeLane 1.07Miles 0.000584 $692,274.006/8/2007 CompleteYCompleted.TxDOTcompletiondate:Dec‐20080912‐71‐655CityofHoustonTerryHersheyParkWestHoustonOn‐StreetBikewayNetwork(Phase2) 1.16Miles 0.0001653 $3,420,128.0012/9/2007 CompleteYCompleted.TxDOTcompletiondate:Aug‐2009Total 0.0154266