alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge MORENO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-16668

Non-Argument Calendar.

D.C. Docket No. 04-20305-CR-JEM.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Aug. 30, 2005.

Sheryl Joyce Lowenthal, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Anne R. Schultz, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, HULL and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Sheryl Joyce Lowenthal, appointed counsel for Jorge Moreno in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the record reveals no issues of arguable merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Moreno’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
Order entered October 17, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00213
- CV
MICHAEL DWAIN WILLIA MS, Appellant

V. LUPE VALDEZ, SHERIFF , Appellee On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 17
- 09709



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s motion for correction of reporter’s record. Appellant asserts the reporter’s record contains several mistakes and asks the matter be referred to the trial

court

. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing, no later than November 19, 2018 , to determine if the reporter’s record contains any inaccuracies as alleged in appellant’s motion

. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.6 (e)(3). If inaccuracies are found, the court reporter shall conform the reporter’s record to what occurred in the trial court and file certified
corrections in this Court. See id. The trial court shall file, no later than November 26, 2018 , written fin dings and shall
have a supplemental clerk’s record containing the findings and any relevant orders filed with theCourt. The record of the hearing shall also be filed in a supplemental reporter’s record. Both

supplemental records shall be filed no later than November 28, 2018.
We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order and appellant’s motion to (1) the Honorable Jim Jorda n , Presiding Judge of the 16 0 th Judicial District Court; and (2) Sharron Rankin, Official Court Reporter for the 16 0 th Judicial District Court . A copy of this
order shall also be sent to the parties.
We ABATE the appeal , including the deadline for filing appellant’s brief on the merits, to allow the trial court an opportunity to conduct the requested hearing. The a ppeal will remain
abated until further order of this Court.
/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011�1003

Combined Multibeam and LIDAR Bathymetry Data from Eastern Long Island Sound and Westernmost Block Island Sound � A Regional Perspective

----

## Introduction 

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior |		U.S. Geological Survey
34061.

#### MOON v. MOON.

Submitted September 15, 1978

Decided October 18, 1978.

*Mull, Sweet & Harper, John F. Sweet,*for appellant.

*Kyle Yancey,*for appellee.

Per curiam.

There was evidence to sustain the trial judge’s reduction of the father’s child support obligation. Code Ann. § 30-220.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,150,355
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,973,739
<ALLOWANCES>                                   255,592
<INVENTORY>                                 22,220,037
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            29,278,880
<PP&E>                                       2,550,807
<DEPRECIATION>                                 287,943
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              44,279,193
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,536,158
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,190
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,469,178
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                44,279,193
<SALES>                                     26,280,926
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            26,280,926
<CGS>                                       15,994,418
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,337,339
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (44,915)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (229,476)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,764,609
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,813,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,951,609
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,951,609
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .76
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 99.1

SCHOOL SPECIALTY, INC.

SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

FISCAL YEARS ENDED APRIL 30, 2005, APRIL 29, 2006 AND APRIL 28, 2007



|                                |  |                |  |                              |  |                             |  |                         |     |  |            |       |  |                        |  |               
|------------------------------- |  | -------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | --------------------------- |  | ----------------------- | --- |  | ---------- | ----- |  | ---------------------- |  | --------------
|Description                     |  | Date           |  | Balance atBeginningof Period |  | Charged toCosts andExpenses |  | Charged toOtherAccounts |     |  | Deductions |       |  | Balance atEnd ofPeriod |  | Date          
|Allowance for doubtful accounts |  | April 24, 2004 |  | 6,627,000                    |  | 945,000                     |  | 84,000                  | (a) |  | (3,591,000 | ) (b) |  | 4,065,000              |  | April 30, 2005
|                                |  | April 30, 2005 |  | 4,065,000                    |  | 1,243,000                   |  | 583,000                 | (a) |  | (2,011,000 | ) (b) |  | 3,880,000              |  | April 29, 2006
|                                |  | April 29, 2006 |  | 3,880,000                    |  | 1,270,000                   |  |                        |     |  | (349,000   | )     |  | 4,801,000              |  | April 28, 2007
|                                |  |                |  |                              |  |                             | 
|Restructuring reserve           |  | April 24, 2004 |  | 241,000                      |  |                            |  |                        |     |  | (241,000   | )     |  |                       |  | April 30, 2005
|                                |  | April 30, 2005 |  |                             |  | 4,002,000                   |  |                        |     |  | (1,673,000 | )     |  | 2,329,000              |  | April 29, 2006
|                                |  | April 29, 2006 |  | 2,329,000                    |  | 590,000                     |  |                        |     |  | (2,694,000 | )     |  | 225,000                |  | April 28, 2007

---

|(a) | Allowance for doubtful accounts acquired in purchase acquisitions.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------

|(b) | Represents write-offs of uncollectable accounts receivable offset by recoveries of previously written-off accounts receivable.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**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 quarterly report of Cyber Defense Systems, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
      C. Robinson, CEO, Chairman and Principal Executive Officer, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,
      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.




**CYBER
                DEFENSE
                SYSTEMS, INC.**By:
              /s/ William C. Robinson
                William
                  C. Robinson
                CEO,
                  President, Chairman and
                Principal
                  Executive OfficerDate:
                  May 21,
                  2007
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Veeco Instruments Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,David D. Glass, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ DAVID D. GLASS                                                                 |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | David D. Glass                                                                     |
|   | Executive Vice President  and Chief Financial Officer  Veeco Instruments Inc. |
|   | July 28, 2010                                                                 |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to VeecoInstruments Inc. and will be retained by Veeco Instruments Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

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.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

June 25, 2012

s0618

Order 

June 25, 2012

144174 & (14)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144174

COA: 302663

Oakland CC: 2005-203497-FC

ROUMMEL JEROME INGRAM,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 5, 2011 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to remand is DENIED.
# C_2012399EN.01001401.xml

| 22.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/14

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Cosenza (Italy) lodged on 19 October 2012 — CCIAA di Cosenza v CIESSE SRL in liquidation

(Case C-468/12)

2012/C 399/24

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale di Cosenza

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Camera di Commercio, Industria, Artigianato e Agricoltura (CCIAA) di Cosenza

Applicant:

Defendant: CIESSE SRL in liquidation

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Do the Italian rules governing the methods for calculating the annual duty to be paid by all persons engaged in economic activity conflict with Article 5 of Directive 2008/7/EC (1) of 12 February 2008 in so far as they place a significantly greater burden on the operation of a business activity by a capital company (‘capital company’ being understood in the exhaustive sense provided for in [Directive 2008/7/EC]) than by a sole trader, inasmuch as under those rules (i) sole traders pay fixed annual duty of EUR 200 if registered in the ordinary section or EUR 88 if noted in the special section, (ii) società semplici agricole (agricultural partnerships) pay fixed annual duty of EUR 100 (in addition to EUR 20 for each local unit), (iii) local units and/or branches of undertakings having their seat abroad pay fixed duty of EUR 110, (iv) non-agricultural partnerships pay fixed duty of EUR 200, and (v) law firms pay fixed duty of EUR 200, whereas all other collective economic undertakings (companies, consortia, and so on) are required to pay ‘duty as a proportion of the preceding year’s turnover’ (thereby paying as much as EUR 40 000)?

1

società semplici agricole

---

(1)  Council Directive 2008/7/EC of 12 February 2008 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital (OJ 2008 L 46, p. 11).

1

---
Exhibit 31.1

            PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Donald R. Mayer, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of WorldNet, Inc.
of Nevada;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statement made, in light of the circumstances under which statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
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 small
business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.    The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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
small business issuer 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 small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

      (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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

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

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

      (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.

                                /s/ Donald R. Mayer
Date: November 10, 2004         ____________________________________________
                                Donald R. Mayer, Principal Executive Officer
No. 44291.

#### Protest 883025-G (D) of Philip Lien (New York).

Opinion by

Bbown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is bodies, hoods,, forms, or shapes similar to those the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protest was therefore sustained.
Exhibit 99.1

     Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of DND
Technologies, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), hereby certify that:

      To my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: November 19, 2002


                                          BY: /s/ Douglas N. Dixon
                                             -----------------------
                                             DOUGLAS N. DIXON
                                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Dated: November 19, 2002


                                          BY: /s/ Paul Gallo
                                             -----------------------
                                             PAUL GALLO
                                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
# C_2012303EN.01001401.xml

| 6.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/14

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 11 July 2012 — Ralph Schmidt (in his capacity as liquidator in respect of the assets of Aletta Zimmerman) v Lilly Hertel

(Case C-328/12)

2012/C 303/26

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ralph Schmidt (in his capacity as liquidator in respect of the assets of Aletta Zimmerman)

Applicant:

Defendant: Lilly Hertel

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

The following question regarding the interpretation of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings (1) is to be referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling:

1

Do the courts of the Member State within the territory of which insolvency proceedings regarding the debtor’s assets have been opened have jurisdiction to decide an action to set a transaction aside by virtue of insolvency that is brought against a person whose place of residence or registered office is not within the territory of a Member State?

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 160, p. 1.

1

---
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 25, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-20906

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FEDERICO PEREZ, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-95-CR-142-43

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

Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Trude K. Scott, the attorney appointed to represent Federico

Perez, Jr., on appeal, has requested leave to withdraw and has

filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967). Our review of counsel’s brief and Perez’s response and

our independent review of the record show that there are no

nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further
No. 01-20906

-2-

responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2.

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THERMO
VOLTEK CORP.'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 27,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1997
<CASH>                                          15,718
<SECURITIES>                                     3,022
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,075
<ALLOWANCES>                                       684
<INVENTORY>                                     11,326
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                42,471
<PP&E>                                          10,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,544
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,856
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,087
<BONDS>                                          8,450
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           497
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,768
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    64,802
<SALES>                                         32,736
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,736
<CGS>                                           18,042
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   18,042
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,712
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   144
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 869
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    410
<INCOME-TAX>                                       156
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                254
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       254
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
        

</TABLE>
No. 96-5847.

#### Lightner *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.