alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:12-cr-282

Alfredo Ramos 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 33) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to Count 1 of the information, and he is

hereby adjudged guilty on that count. The court will defer the

decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until the

sentencing hearing.

Date: January 7, 2014 s\James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge

Case: 2:13-cr-00282-JLG-EPD Doc #: 35 Filed: 01/07/14 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000101295
<NAME> UNITED-GUARDIAN, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,684,013
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,020,605
<ALLOWANCES>                                    52,258
<INVENTORY>                                  1,188,945
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,198,433
<PP&E>                                       4,509,250
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,979,348
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,503,784
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          318,052
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       488,164
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,323,630
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,503,784
<SALES>                                      6,605,874
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,605,874
<CGS>                                        3,848,171
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,848,171
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 391
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,375,219
<INCOME-TAX>                                   522,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            852,719
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   852,719
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        

</TABLE>
1 

## ... T h i s pr oce edi n g a r i s es ou t of Cau s e N o. 200 8
- C I- 2 0 0 84, s t y l ed C o u n se l F in a n c ia l S e rv ic e s v . D a v id M cQ u a d e L eib o w i t

z, P C , a n d D a vid M cQ u a d e L eib o w i t z, p e n d ing in the 2 2 5 th J u d ic ia l D istric t C o u rt, B e x a r C o u n ty, T e x a s, the H o n o ra b le P e te r S a k a i p re sid ing , an d C a u se N o . 2 0 0 8 -C I-2 0 0 8 5 , p e n d ing in the 2 8 5 th J u d ic ia l D istric t C o u rt, B ex ar Coun t y , T ex as , t h e H on or abl e M i ch ae l Peden pr es i di n g . H owe v er , t h e ch al l en g ed or der s we r e s i g n ed b y t he H o no rab l e Jo hn D
. G ab riel , p resid i ng jud ge o f t he 1 3 1 st Ju d i cial D i st rict C o urt, B ex ar C o un t y, T ex as. 

### i i i i i i



# MEM ORA ND UM OP INION

No. 04-09-00081- CV IN RE COUNSEL FINAN CIAL SERVICES , L.L.C.

Orig inal Mandamus Proce eding 1


## PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Kar en Ang elini, J ustice

Phylis J . Speedlin, J ustice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: November 4, 2009 PETI TI ON F OR WR I T OF MANDAMUS DEN I ED In this original manda

mus procee ding, r elator Counsel Financia l Services, L .L .C. complains of the tr ial court’s or ders grantingthe motion for re lief fr om the enfor ceme nt of the fore ign judgment. Also pendingbefor e this court ar e consolidate d Cause Nos. 04-09- 00079-CV and 04-09-00080- CV, which cha l leng e the same orde r as r elator c halleng es in this mandamus pr oc e e din g . T o b e e nti tle d to mand amus re lie f, re lator mus t show the tr ia l c ourt c le arl y a bu se d it s discretion and r elator has no adequa te remedy at law. In re Prude ntial Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W .3d04
- 09
- 00 08 1- CV

- 2- 

## 12 4, 13 5 ( Te x. 20 04 ); W alker v . Pack

er , 827 S.W .2d 833, 839-40 (Te x . 199 2 ). The c ourt has considere d relator’s petition and is of the opinion t h at re l at o r i s not entitled to the relief sought beca use it has an adequa

te reme dy by appea l. Acc ording ly , relator’s petition f or writ of mandamus is denied. T EX 

## . R. A PP 

## . P. 52.8(a)
. PER C URIAM
# C_2008250EN.01000601.xml

| 2.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 250/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 250/6

---

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

1

4,65 % on 1 October 2008

Euro exchange rates (2)

2

1 October 2008

(2008/C 250/03)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4081 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 149,55 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4604 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,7919 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,7268 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5818 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 156,68 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,26 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,513 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 241,65 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7091 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,3819 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,7364 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 30,304 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,792 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7658 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4912 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,9381 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0839 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0196 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 680,57 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,6408 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,6434 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,1123 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 370,85 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8474 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 66,67 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 36,1395 |
| THB | Thai baht | 47,854 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6829 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,3976 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4081

JPY

Japanese yen

149,55

DKK

Danish krone

7,4604

GBP

Pound sterling

0,7919

SEK

Swedish krona

9,7268

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5818

ISK

Iceland króna

156,68

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,26

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,513

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

241,65

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7091

PLN

Polish zloty

3,3819

RON

Romanian leu

3,7364

SKK

Slovak koruna

30,304

TRY

Turkish lira

1,792

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7658

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4912

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,9381

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0839

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0196

KRW

South Korean won

1 680,57

ZAR

South African rand

11,6408

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,6434

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,1123

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 370,85

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8474

PHP

Philippine peso

66,67

RUB

Russian rouble

36,1395

THB

Thai baht

47,854

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6829

MXN

Mexican peso

15,3976

---

(1)

1

Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

2

Source:

---
Exhibit 31.1



                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Arnold Simon, certify that,

(1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10Q/A of Aris Industries,
Inc.;

(2) Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

(b) (Intentionally omitted)

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and


<PAGE>


(5) The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize, and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls over
financial reporting;

Date:  August 13, 2004



/s/ Arnold Simon
    Chief Executive Officer
# C_2017151EN.01000301.xml

| 15.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 151/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 151/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie — Belgium) — Samira Achbita, Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding v G4S Secure Solutions NV

(Case C-157/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 2000/78/EC - Equal treatment - Discrimination based on religion or belief - Workplace regulations of an undertaking prohibiting workers from wearing visible political, philosophical or religious signs in the workplace - Direct discrimination - None - Indirect discrimination - Female worker prohibited from wearing an Islamic headscarf))

(2017/C 151/03)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Samira Achbita, Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding

Applicants:

Defendant: G4S Secure Solutions NV

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(2)(a) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation must be interpreted as meaning that the prohibition on wearing an Islamic headscarf, which arises from an internal rule of a private undertaking prohibiting the visible wearing of any political, philosophical or religious sign in the workplace, does not constitute direct discrimination based on religion or belief within the meaning of that directive.

By contrast, such an internal rule of a private undertaking may constitute indirect discrimination within the meaning of Article 2(2)(b) of Directive 2000/78 if it is established that the apparently neutral obligation it imposes results, in fact, in persons adhering to a particular religion or belief being put at a particular disadvantage, unless it is objectively justified by a legitimate aim, such as the pursuit by the employer, in its relations with its customers, of a policy of political, philosophical and religious neutrality, and the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary, which it is for the referring court to ascertain.

---

(1)  OJ C 205, 22.6.2015.

1

---
# C_2016055EN.01000101.xml

| 12.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/1

---

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

2013-2014 SESSION

Sittings of 20 to 23 May 2013

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 246 E, 27.8.2013.

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 246 E, 27.8.2013.

TEXTS ADOPTED

---
U.S. Geological SurveyGeologic Quadrangle Map GQ-1800  Version 1.0

Geologic Map of the Buckeystown Quadrangle, Frederick and Montgomery Counties, Maryland, and Loudoun County, Virginia

***By*****Scott Southworth1*and* David K. Brezinski2**

1U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA 20192.
No. 40336.

#### Protest 958296-G of American Paulin System (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 38368 the aneroid barometers in question were held dutiable at 27)4 percent under paragraph 372 as claimed.
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with this quarterly report of Torotel, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending January 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dale H. Sizemore, Jr., Chief Executive 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 2002, that to my knowledge:





(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Dale H. Sizemore, Jr.Dale H. Sizemore, Jr.Chief Executive OfficerAugust 15, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           UT
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                    JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                      JUN-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                      PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                         1,048,717
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                       119,627
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                            192,108
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                          10,666
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                    300,188
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    1,671,306
<COMMON>                                          282,271
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                         (31)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                               167,378
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                    449,618
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                              518,191
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                         48,684
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                    0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                     6,806
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                         0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                       16,322
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                  361
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                    631,324
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                     1,671,306
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                         333,200
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                              31,376
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                        253,424
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                        284,800
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                           48,400
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                57
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                    48,457
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          24,570
<NET-INCOME>                                      23,887
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       66
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                     23,768
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          20,225
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                         32,368
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                            16,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.69



</TABLE>
No. 51185.

#### Protests 30357-K, etc., of George E. Mallinson Importing Co., Inc. (New York).

*304Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Stephen Rug Mills*v. *United States*(32 C. C. P. A. 110, C. A. D. 293), and by the court's decision on remand in Abstract 50056. In accordance therewith the protests were sustained as claimed
Motion Granted; Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed; and 

Memorandum Opinion filed January 9, 2014.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-13-00956-CV

IN RE PATRICIA A. MILLARD, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

133rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2011-12131

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 28, 2013, relator Patricia A. Millard filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 

52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Jaclanel 

McFarland, presiding judge of the 133rd District Court of Harris County, to vacate 

a discovery order dated on or about August 13, 2013.
2

On December 18, 2013, relator filed a motion to dismiss her petition for writ 

of mandamus. We grant the motion and dismiss relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Jamison.
# Official Journal C 256/2020

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 256 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 634 August 2020 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 256

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 634 August 2020

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2020/C 256/01 | Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,00 % on 1 August 2020 — Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2020/C 256/02 | New national side of euro coins intended for circulation | 2 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2020/C 256/01

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,00 % on 1 August 2020 — Euro exchange rates

1

2020/C 256/02

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2020/C 256/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9915 – Mitsubishi Corporation Energy/ENEOS/Taiyo Koyu) Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 3 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2020/C 256/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9915 – Mitsubishi Corporation Energy/ENEOS/Taiyo Koyu) Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

3

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
APPENDIX S-A-1

SEGMENT 2C - SIDE RUNNING AND 

MEDIAN OPTIONS

S-A-1-1
S-A-1-2
S-A-1-3
S-A-1-4
S-A-1-5
S-A-1-6
S-A-1-7
S-A-1-8
S-A-1-9
S-A-1-10
S-A-1-11
S-A-1-12
S-A-1-13
S-A-1-14
S-A-1-15
S-A-1-16
S-A-1-17
S-A-1-18
S-A-1-19
S-A-1-20
S-A-1-21
S-A-1-22
S-A-1-23
S-A-1-24
S-A-1-25
S-A-1-26
S-A-1-27
S-A-1-28
S-A-1-29
S-A-1-30
S-A-1-31
S-A-1-32
S-A-1-33
S-A-1-34
S-A-1-35
S-A-1-36
S-A-1-37
S-A-1-38
S-A-1-39
S-A-1-40
S-A-1-41
S-A-1-42
S-A-1-43
S-A-1-44
S-A-1-45
S-A-1-46
S-A-1-47
S-A-1-48
S-A-1-49
S-A-1-50
S-A-1-51
S-A-1-52
S-A-1-53
S-A-1-54
S-A-1-55
S-A-1-56
S-A-1-57
S-A-1-58
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6583

LOTOREY J. GREENE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

SUMTER COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER; SIMON

MAJOR, Director,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, District Judge.

(CA-01-3328)

Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 10, 2002

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lotorey J. Greene, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Molony Condon,

Attorney General, Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Lotorey J. Greene appeals the district court’s judgment

dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. Greene’s case was

referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)

(1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and

advised Greene that failure to file timely objections to this

recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court

order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Greene

failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge’s

recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the

substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned

that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v.

Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v.

Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Greene has waived appellate review by

failing to file objections after receiving proper notice.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.

AFFIRMED