alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________

NO. 09-16-00076-CR

_________________

JOHN PITT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 75th District Court

Liberty County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CR27837

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, John Pitt entered a plea of nolo 

contendere to the offense of theft, a state jail felony. The trial court found Pitt

guilty of the charge as alleged in the indictment, sentenced Pitt to two years

confinement, but suspended his sentence and placed Pitt on community supervision 

for five years and assessed a fine of $500. The State subsequently filed a motion to 

revoke Pitt’s unexpired community supervision, alleging four violations of the 
2

conditions of his community supervision. Pitt pled “true” to violating the four

conditions of his community supervision. After a hearing on the State’s motion to 

revoke, the trial court found that Pitt violated the conditions of his community 

supervision, revoked Pitt’s community supervision, and sentenced Pitt to two years 

in state jail. 

Pitt’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 

1978). Counsel’s brief presents his professional evaluation of the record and 

concludes there are no arguable grounds to be advanced in this appeal. Counsel 

provided Pitt with a copy of his Anders brief. We granted an extension of time for 

Pitt to file a pro se brief, but we received no response from Pitt.

We have independently reviewed the clerk’s record and the reporter’s 

record, and we agree with Pitt’s appellate counsel that no arguable issues support 

an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel 

to re-brief Pitt’s appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1

 1 Pitt may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for 

discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 
3

AFFIRMED.

 

______________________________

 CHARLES KREGER

 Justice

Submitted on August 1, 2016

Opinion Delivered September 7, 2016

Do not publish

Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.
Exhibit
10.2


 


PROPOSED
AMENDMENT

TO 1999 EMPLOYEE STOCK OPTION PLAN


 


 


This amendment (this “Amendment”) dated September
    , 2003 amends the 1999 Employee Stock Option Plan (the
“Stock Option Plan”) of Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. (the “Company”).


 


WITNESSETH:


 


WHEREAS, the Company intends to complete an
initial public offering (the “IPO”); and


 


WHEREAS, the Company wishes to amend the
terms of the Stock Option Plan as described below;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Stock Option Plan is
amended as follows:


 


 


1.                 Section 3 of the
1999 Employee Stock Option Plan shall be amended in its entirety to read as
follows:


 


“Subject to adjustment pursuant to Section 9, 34,958,163 shares of
Stock shall be reserved for issuance upon the exercise of Stock Options granted
pursuant to this Plan.  On the first day
of each fiscal year, the Stock reserve shall automatically be increased by a
number of shares equal to the least of (i) 2.5% of the then outstanding shares
of Stock, (ii) 7,765,812 shares, or (iii) a number determined by the Board.  Any shares of Stock from increases in
previous years that are not actually issued will continue to be included in the
aggregate number of shares available for future issuance.”


 


2.                 Effectiveness.
This Amendment shall be deemed effective immediately prior to the consummation
of the IPO.
Order entered November 15, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00823-CR

PETTIS LAMOND GAGE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F18-75773-T

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s November 9, 2022 motion to extend the time 

to file his jurisdictional letter brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time 

for appellant to file his jurisdictional letter brief to December 9, 2022. The time to 

file the State’s responsive letter brief is extended to December 30, 2022.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**AMERICAN
      TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC.**




**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 Quarterly Report of American Technologies Group, Inc. (the
      Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended January 31, 2007 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dr.
      Gary
      Fromm, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:




(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.




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      American Technologies Group, Inc. and will be retained by American Technologies
      Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff
      upon request.




Date:
      3/26/07




/s/
                Dr. Gary FrommDr.
                Gary Fromm
              CHAIRMAN
                OF THE BOARD AND CHIEF FINANCIAL
                OFFICER
No. 53892.

#### The Danwill Company *v.*United States,

protest 148166-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the issues and facts herein are similar to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were in fact not landed. In accordance with stipulation and following the decision cited it was held that the merchandise, insofar as it involves the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, is subject to an allowance in duties. The protest was sustained to this extent.
IA

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 90

Withdrawing the approval of the United States from the Agreement

establishing the World Trade Organization.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 6, 2000

Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. TAYLOR of

Mississippi, Mr. METCALF, and Mr. HUNTER) introduced the following

joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and

Means

JOINT RESOLUTION

Withdrawing the approval of the United States from the

Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the Congress withdraws its approval, provided under

4 section 101(a) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, of

5 the WTO Agreement as defined in section 2(9) of that

6 Act.

Æ
(Reap. Dec. 10286)

Entry No. 5141 H.

#### United States *v.*W. R. Zanes & Company

(Decided June 27, 1962)

*Joseph D. Gmlfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the plaintiff.

*Walter B. Zanes, Jr.,*for the defendant.

OliveR, Chief Judge:

Counsel for the respective parties have submitted this appeal for reappraisement for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

IT IS PIEREBT STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto:

> 1. That the merechandise subject of the above-entitled reappraisement appeal consists of certain nonalcoholic liquids for polishing exported from England on or about November 10, 1960 and entered at the Port of Houston, Texas on or about November 23,1960.

> 2. That said merchandise is specified in the final list (T.D. 54521) published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to section 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 and is therefore subject to appraisement under the pro*345visions of section 402a of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the said Simplification Act.

> 3. That on or about the date of exportation herein such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale in the principal markets of England to all purchasers, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for either home consumption in England nor for exportation to the United States.

> 4. That on or about the date of exportation herein such merchandise was freely offered for sale for domestic consumption, packed ready for delivery in the principal market of the United States to all purchasers, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade.

> 5. That the price at which such merchandise was freely offered to all purchasers for domestic consumption in the principal market of the United States with allowance made for duty, cost of transportation and insurance, and other necessary expenses from the place of shipment to the place of delivery and for profit of 8 per centum and allowance for general expenses of 8 per centum was $29,413 per gross.

On tbe agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is statutory cost of production and hold that such value is $29,413 per gross.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 52855.

#### H. G. Brake & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 133602-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the issues and facts herein are similar to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as not landed were not in fact landed. In accordance with stipulation and following the decision cited it was held that the merchandise, insofar as it involves the quantities reported by the inspector as “manifested, not landed, not found,” is subject to an allowance in duties. The protest was sustained to this extent.
Exhibit 32b

Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18of the United States Code

I, Morton A. Plawner, Chief Financial Officer of PSE&G Transition Funding II LLC, to the best of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Annual Report of PSE&G Transition Funding II LLC on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2007 (the "Periodic Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of PSE&G Transition Funding II LLC.

/s/
	MORTONA. PLAWNERMorton A. PlawnerChief Financial OfficerMarch 14, 2008


---
**Exhibit 32.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Nicholas J. DeIuliis, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) ofCNX Gas Corporation (the “Registrant”), certify that to my knowledge, based upon a review of theAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006, of the Registrant (the“Report”):(i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.Date:February 19, 2007     /s/ Nicholas J. DeIuliis     **Nicholas J. DeIuliis**  **President, Chief Executive Officer and Director**
March 30,1959

No. 62943. Suit 4967.

#### Stoeger Arms Corp. *v*United States.

A.R.D. 86 affirmed December 15, 1958. C.A.D. 696.
Eagle Bancorp, Inc. - 10-Q

Exhibit
32.1



CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In
connection with the Form 10-Q of Eagle Bancorp, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2019, I, Susan G. Riel, President and Chief
Executive Officer of Eagle Bancorp, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:



(1)
such Form 10-Q 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 such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Eagle Bancorp, Inc.



|/s/ Susan G. Riel                                    |  | Date: August 9, 2019
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------
|Susan G. Riel                                        |  |                     
|President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company | 



72
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         November 2, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on October 25, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 85 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-26, CP2024-26.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-24147 Filed 11-1-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
sage-ex1042_253.htm



 


		
	

	
215 First Street, Cambridge, MA 02142

www.sagerx.com

	
 
	
 




 

 

Exhibit 10.42

 

December 15, 2020

 

Jeff Jonas, MD

 

 

Dear Jeff:

 

We would like to thank you for your contributions toward achieving our mission to make life better for patients with central nervous systems diseases.  We are pleased to confirm the details of your new role, Chief Innovation Officer, effective December 15, 2020.

Your base rate of compensation will be $26,042 bi-monthly (annualized rate of $625,000), less all applicable federal, state, and local taxes and withholdings, to be paid in installments in accordance with the Company's standard payroll practices.  Such base salary may be adjusted from time to time in accordance with normal business practices and at the sole discretion of the Company.  

In addition, you will continue to be eligible to participate in the Sage Bonus Plan at an annual target of 45% of your base rate of compensation.  This discretionary bonus will be based on the Company’s assessment and attainment of corporate and individual goals.  For calendar year 2020, you will be eligible to receive your bonus at your current target of 60% with payout determined by the Compensation Committee and Board based on corporate goal achievement.

 

You will also continue to participate in all Sage benefits plans as well as be eligible for our annual long-term incentive program.  Your existing Change in Control/Severance agreement will remain in place and in effect as well with the understanding that any future implementation of its provisions will be based on the parameters of your new role.

 

Very truly yours,


Sage Therapeutics, Inc.

 

 

/s/ Erin Lanciani                                    

Erin Lanciani

SVP, People & Organizational Strategy

 

Agreed to and accepted:

 

 

/s/ Jeffrey Jonas, M.D.______            December 15, 2020

Jeffrey Jonas, M.D.DATE
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings-Regulation of Voice Calls 

from Mobile Wireless Devices on Aircraft, Department of Transportation Advisory 

Committee for Aviation Consumer Protection
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                         511,927
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,651,307
<ALLOWANCES>                                    42,155
<INVENTORY>                                    934,294
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,195,317
<PP&E>                                       8,553,382
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,117,050
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,722,558
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,615,604
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,326
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,958,032
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,722,558
<SALES>                                      2,028,308
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,865,825
<CGS>                                        3,690,124
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,667,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,877,319
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                42,155
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              81,417
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (9,760,858)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,760,858)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.54)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
(Reap. Dec. 10291)

Entry No. 920538.

#### Associated Merchandising Corp. *v.*United States

(Decided July 3, 1962)

*Barnes, Richardson & BoVmrn*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph D. Guilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Kao, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, as follows:

> 1. That this stipulation is limited to the items marked “A” and initialed GRG by Examiner G. R. Goldner on the invoices covered by the above-entitled appeal for reappraisement.

> 2. That such merchandise is not identified in the Einal List published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (T.D. 54521), and accordingly was appraised on the basis of Section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the said Customs Simplification Act.

> 3. That on or about the date of exportation of the merchandise involved, such or similar merchandise was freely sold or offered for sale in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States at $9.97 per dozen, net, packed, such price including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States.

> 4. That the above-entitled appeal may be submitted on this stipulation, the same being limited to the merchandise and issues described hereinabove and abandoned in all other respects.

Upon tbe agreed facts, I find export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise marked “A” and initialed GRG, by Examiner G. R. Goldner, on the invoices covered by this appeal for reappraisement, and that such value was $9.97 per dozen, net, packed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.1 D


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the inclusion in this registration statement on Form S-4
(File No. 333-80131) of our report dated February 19, 1999 (except for Note 9,
as to which the date is April 21, 1999), on our audits of the financial
statements of DaMert Company as of and for the years ended December 31, 1998
and 1997. We also consent to the reference to our firm under the caption
"experts."

                                        /s/ARMANINO McKENNA LLP



San Leandro, California
August 5, 1999
Exhibit 13.1 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 Form 20FR12G Registration Statement of Aquasol Envirotech Ltd. for the year ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1.The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.  Date: September 25, 2006   "Yenyou (Jeff) Zheng " Yenyou (Jeff) Zheng Chief Financial Officer, President & Director
No. 62413.

#### W. L. Thomas Company *v.*United States,

protest 58/440 (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The protest was dismissed.