alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 99-1141.

#### Ferm *v.*United States Trustee.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1281 Introduced in Senate (IS)]
```
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6247** 

MAURICE B. STEWART, JR. , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

DR. JOUBERT; DR. COLIN OTTEY; CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES INC.; WARDEN PHILLIP MORGAN; ASSISTANT WARDEN HARRY MURPHY; CHIEF OF SECURITY MICHAEL P. THOMAS; DR. GETACHEW; NURSE MANAGER JEANETTE SIMMONS; ASSISTANT WARDEN RICHARD J. GRAHAM, JR

. , Defendants

– Appellees , and

WARDEN , Defendant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. J. Frederick Motz , Senior District Judge. ( 1:11

- cv
- 00427

- JFM )

Submitted : June 14, 2012 Decided: June 22, 2012

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.2 M aurice B. Stewart, Jr. , Appellant Pro Se. Philip Melton Andrews , Katrina J. Dennis , KRAMON & GRAHAM, PA , Baltimore, Maryland ; Stephanie Judith Lane

- Weber, Assistant Attorney General , Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Maurice B. Stewart, Jr. appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Ac cordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. See Stewart v. Joubert , No. 1:11

- cv
- 00427

- JFM (D. Md.
Jan. 31, 2012). 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
Third Amendment to 2004 Stock Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.1 
 THIRD AMENDMENT 
 TO 
 2004 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN 
 THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO 2004 STOCK INCENTIVE
PLAN (the “Amendment”) is made and adopted, effective as of September 12, 2007 (the “Effective Date”), by CALLWAVE, INC., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), with reference to
the following facts. 
 RECITALS: 
 A. The Company previously adopted that certain 2004 Stock Option Plan dated effective April 27, 2004, (the “Option Plan”), and the stockholders and Board of Directors of the Company set aside thereunder One Million
Seven Hundred Thousand (1,700,000) shares of Common Stock as of April 27, 2004, to permit certain additional administrative procedures in connection with the operation of the Option Plan. 
 B. Pursuant to the “evergreen” provisions of Section 5.1(b) of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Corporation has approved the
setting aside of an additional One Million Forty-Four Thousand Forty-Three (1,044,043) shares of Common Stock under the Option Plan, and the Company is executing this Amendment in order memorialize that action. 
 AMENDMENT: 
 NOW, THEREFORE,
the Company hereby amends the Option Plan as follows: 
 1. INCREASE IN AUTHORIZED SHARES. Effective as of the Effective Date, the
number of shares of Common Stock set aside under the Option Plan for the granting of options and issuance of shares of restricted stock thereunder is hereby increased by One Million Forty-Four Thousand Forty-Three (1,044,043) shares, to a total
of Four Million Seven Hundred Seventy-Three Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty-Five (4,773,965). 
 2. MISCELLANEOUS. Except as expressly
modified by this Amendment, the Option Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed and remains in full force and effect. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the undersigned has executed this Third Amendment, effective as of the “Effective Date” described above. 
  

			
	CALLWAVE, INC., a Delaware corporation
		
	By	 	/s/ Jeffrey Cavins
		 	Jeffrey Cavins
		 	President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32

Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Hanger, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.

/s/ VINIT K. ASAR Vinit K. Asar Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ GEORGE E. MCHENRY George E. McHenry Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer)March 18, 2013


---



QuickLinks
#### Randolph G. JORDAN, Appellant, v. KEYS COVE MARINE, INC., Appellee.

No. 97-2955.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 21, 1998.

Gus H. Crowell, Tavernier; Steven M. Goldsmith, Boca Raton, for appellant.

No appearance on behalf of appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GODERICH and FLETCHER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Because the note and mortgage personally guaranteed by appellant/defendant Randolph G. Jordan were satisfied as reflected in the satisfaction of mortgage executed by Keys Cove Marine, Inc., we reverse the “final [deficiency] judgment for plaintiff” and remand for the entry of final judgment in favor of Jordan. *See Matey v. Pruitt,*510 So.2d 351 (Fla. 2d DCA) (once debtor’s obligation has been paid or otherwise satisfied, guarantor’s obligation is terminated), *rev. denied,*518 So.2d 1276 (Fla.1987).

Reversed and remanded.
|    |                                                                                                                                |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Amtech Systems, Inc. (the “registrant”); |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 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; |

|          |
|----------|
|          |  |  |  |
| By  | /s/ Fokko Pentinga |   |
|     | Fokko Pentinga |   |
|     | Chief Executive Officer |   |
|     | Amtech Systems, Inc. |   |
|     | Date: | January 26, 2018 |   |
No. 99-7945.

#### Putney *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 144 (Monday, July 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 40340]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19736]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER96-2663-000; Docket No. ER97-411-000]


Commonwealth Electric Company; Cambridge Electric Light Company; 
Notice of Filing

July 22, 1997.
    Take notice that on June 9, 1997, Commonwealth Electric Company 
(Commonwealth) and Cambridge Electric Light Company (Cambridge), 
collectively referred to as the ``Companies'', tendered for filing with 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a request, to allow the 
withdrawal of four (4) Service Agreements under the Companies' Power 
Sales and Exchange Tariffs (FERC Electric Tariff Original Volume Nos. 3 
& 5) with Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NIMO) and Western Power 
Services, Inc. (WPS). These Service Agreements were filed in Docket 
Nos. ER96-2553-000 and ER97-411-000 and have not been acted upon. NIMO 
and WPS will instead take service under the Companies' Market-Based 
Power Sales Tariffs (FERC Electric Tariff Original Volume Nos. 7 & 9).
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before July 28, 1997. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-19736 Filed 7-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1252 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1252

To amend section 1922A of title 38, United States Code, to increase the 
    amount of supplemental insurance available for totally disabled 
                               veterans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 15, 2005

Mr. Akaka (for himself and Mr. Salazar) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend section 1922A of title 38, United States Code, to increase the 
    amount of supplemental insurance available for totally disabled 
                               veterans.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Disabled Veterans Insurance 
Improvement Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE FOR TOTALLY DISABLED VETERANS.

    Section 1922A of title 38, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``$20,000'' and inserting ``$40,000''.
                                 <all>
```
# THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 7TH DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNT Y, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 30th
day of January, 2015 , the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

JUSTIN DAVIS , Appellant

NO. 12

- 13

- 00367

- CR; Trial Court No. 007

- 0653

- 13

Opinion by James T. Worthen, Chief Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made it s order in these words:

“ THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of the court

below be in all things affirmed , and that this decision be certified to the court below for

observance. ”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN , Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of

T yler, this the 27 th day of March , 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By:

_______________________________ Chief Deputy Clerk
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

December 30, 2014

p1215 

# Order

Clerk December 30, 2014

148364 & (17)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148364

COA: 318128

Clinton CC: 13

- 009068

- FC

JACKIE LAMONT THOMPSON,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________/

By order of September 24, 2014, the prosecuting attorney was directed to answer

the application for leave to appeal the December 3, 2013 order of the Court of Appeals.

On order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to

ap peal is again considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to

appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration, as on leave

granted, of whether the conduct of the defendant with the victim prior to the commission

of the sentencing offense may be considered when scoring Offense Variable 7, and if so,

what evidence may support that scoring. MCL 777.37; People v McGraw, 484 Mich 120

(2009). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persua ded

that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Krupp
Realty Fund 5 Financial Statements for the twelve months ended December
31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,101,415
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  780,538<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,767,572
<PP&E>                                      74,447,714<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                            (45,375,530)<F3>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,721,709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,849,574
<BONDS>                                     41,836,237<F4>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                  (10,964,102)<F5>
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,721,709
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,100,395<F6>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            11,406,704<F7>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,000,780
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   692,911<F8>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F8>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F8>
<FN>
<F1>Includes all receivables grouped in "prepaid expenses and other assets" on
the Balance Sheet.
<F2>Multi-family complexes of $73,882,342 and deferred expenses of $565,372.
<F3>Accumulated depreciaton of $45,292,687 and accumulated amortization of
deferred expenses of $82,843.
<F4>Represents mortgage notes payable.
<F5>Represents total deficit of the General Partners and Limited Partners of
($413,665) and ($10,550,437), respectively.
<F6>Includes all revenue of the Partnership.
<F7>Includes operating expenses of $5,564,553, real estate taxes of $2,117,434
and depreciaton and amortization of $3,724,717.
<F8>Net income allocated $6,929 to the General Partners and $685,982 to the
Limited Partners.  Average net income per Unit Of Limited Partners interest
is $18.31 on 35,200 Units outstanding.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-50098

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FAUSTINO CALVARIO-CERNAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-01-CR-431-ALL 

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

June 19, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Faustino Calvario-Cernas appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He

contends that the sentence is invalid because it exceeds the

two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a). Calvario-Cernas complains that his sentence was

improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based on

his prior deportation following an aggravated felony conviction. 

He argues that the sentencing provision violates the Due Process
No. 02-50098 

-2-

Clause. Alternatively, Calvario-Cernas contends that 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) define separate offenses. He

argues that the aggravated felony conviction that resulted in his

increased sentence was an element of the offense under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) that should have been alleged in his indictment. 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Calvario-Cernas acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). This court

must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court

itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42605]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20762]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE COST OF HIGHER EDUCATION


Meeting

AGENCY: National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education.

ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting.

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

TIME AND DATE: Monday, August 11, 1997; 10 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

PLACE: The meeting site will be 490 L'Enfant Plaza, SW, in room 3208, 
Washington, DC 20407.

STATUS: The meeting will be open to the public from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.

NOTICE: At its inaugural public meeting, the National Commission on the 
Cost of Higher Education established by Public Law 105-18, dated June 
12, 1997, will consider general administrative matters and substantive 
agenda items.

CONTACT PERSON: For further information, contact Bill Hansen at (202) 
466-8621 or write to 1155 15th Street, Suite 801, Washington, DC 20005. 
Please note: The address and telephone number listed for the Commission 
are temporary. Information concerning the new address and telephone 
should be available at the meeting.
William D. Hansen,
Chairperson (Interim).
[FR Doc. 97-20762 Filed 8-5-97; 10:17 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-DR-P
Back to Contents

**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of Savient Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gina Gutzeit, Interim ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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. |
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                 |

|   | By: /s/ Gina Gutzeit               Gina GutzeitInterim Chief Financial Officer |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|

March 28, 2006

----
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Terry L. DENMAN.

No. 60049.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 15, 1977.

In re: Terry L. Denman, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.

*1109Writ denied in part; granted in part. Ruling of trial judge finding probable cause at preliminary examination is correct; however, trial judge is ordered to conduct a bail hearing in accordance with La.Code.Crim.P. Art. 313.

SUMMERS, J.,

while I agree that the trial judge correctly found probable cause at the preliminary examination, I dissent from the order requiring a hearing in accordance with Article 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in this case where applicant is charged with a capital crime. There was no abuse of discretion on the part of the trial judge in refusing bail in this case.

DIXON, J.,

would deny; on the evidence adduced at the preliminary hearing, it was within the discretion of the trial judge to deny bail, since he could reasonably find that the presumption was strong and the proof was great.