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

                                                                     Exhibit 4

                        CONSOLIDATED SILVER CORPORATION
                           STATEMENT OF CANCELLATION
                    PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE SECTION 30-1-67

      TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE, STATE OF IDAHO:

      In  accordance  with Idaho  Code  Section  30-1-67, Consolidated  Silver
Corporation,   an  Idaho   corporation,   hereby  files   this  statement   of
cancellation:

            (a)     The  name   of  the  corporation:     CONSOLIDATED  SILVER
      CORPORATION.

            (b)  The  number of redeemable shares  canceled through redemption
      or purchase, itemized by classes:  Twelve thousand five hundred (12,500)
      Shares  of Preferred  Stock, one  hundred dollars  ($100) per  share par
      value, canceled through purchase.

            (c)  The aggregate  number of issued shares, itemized  by classes,
      after  giving effect to such cancellation:  Zero (0) Shares of Preferred
      Stock;  Nine million four hundred fifty five thousand six hundred eighty
      nine (9,455,689) Shares of Common Stock, ten cents ($0.10) per share par
      value.

            (d)  The amount,  expressed in dollars,  of the stated capital  of
      the  corporation after giving  effect to such  cancellation:  $1,000,000
      stated capital, based  upon 10,000,000 Shares of Common Stock authorized
      at $0.10 per share par value:  

            (e)    Number of  shares the  corporation  will have  authority to
      issue, itemized  by classes, after  giving effect to  such cancellation:
      10,000,000 Shares of Common Stock.

            IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF  this  Statement  of  Cancellation  has  been
executed  by the Vice President and Assistant Secretary of Consolidated Silver
Corporation this 21st day of September, 1995.

                                    CONSOLIDATED SILVER CORPORATION:


                                    By: /s/ Michael B. White            
                                        ---------------------------------
                                                Michael B. White
                                                Vice President


                                    Attest: /s/ Nathaniel K. Adams      
                                            -----------------------------
                                                Nathaniel K. Adams
                                                Assistant Secretary

(Idaho Secretary of State date stamp, October 6, 1995, 10:44 a.m.)
256 La. 375

#### L. C. McCULLEY, d/b/a L. C. McCulley Excavation & Dozer Work v. DUBLIN CONSTRUCTION CO., Inc., Star Home and Development Corp., Wilco Builders, Inc., and Michael J. De George.

No. 50641.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 26, 1970.

In re: Michael J. De George applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 234 So.2d 257.

Writ refused. Under the facts found by the Court of Appeal the result is correct.
US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 3rd QUARTER 2011

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

ANNOUNCEMENT AUCTION SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE DATE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT MONEY

4-WK 3-MO 6-MO 12-MO

4-WEEK AND 6/30 7/5 7/7 12.00 25.00 25.00 78.00 -16.00

3&6&12 MO BILLS 7/7 7/11 7/14 14.00 27.00 26.00 76.00 -9.00

7/14 7/18 7/21 16.00 27.00 26.00 72.00 -3.00

7/21 7/25 7/28 18.00 28.00 27.00 24.00 94.00 3.00

7/28 8/1 8/4 20.00 28.00 27.00 71.00 4.00

8/4 8/8 8/11 22.00 29.00 28.00 72.00 7.00

8/11 8/15 8/18 24.00 29.00 28.00 74.00 7.00

8/18 8/22 8/25 26.00 30.00 29.00 24.00 100.00 9.00

8/25 8/29 9/1 28.00 30.00 29.00 77.00 10.00

9/1 9/6 9/8 30.00 31.00 29.00 78.00 12.00

9/8 9/12 9/15 32.00 31.00 30.00 79.00 14.00

9/15 9/19 9/22 34.00 31.00 30.00 24.00 106.00 13.00

9/22 9/26 9/29 36.00 31.00 30.00 83.00 14.00

1125.00 1060.00 65.00

CASH MANAGEMENT BILLS

56-DAY BILL 7/13 7/14 5.00 5.00 0.00

Matures 9/8

56-DAY BILL 9/7 9/8 5.00 5.00 0.00

Matures 11/3

CMB Funds: 0.00

COUPONS

CHANGE

IN SIZE IN SIZE

3-year Note 7/7 7/12 7/15 32.00 0.00

10-year Note ® 7/7 7/13 7/15 21.00 0.00

30-year Bond ® 7/7 7/14 7/15 13.00 0.00 0.00 66.00

10-year TIPS 7/14 7/21 7/29 13.00 0.00 0.00 13.00

2-year Note 7/21 7/26 8/1 35.00 0.00

5-year Note 7/21 7/27 8/1 35.00 0.00

7-year Note 7/21 7/28 8/1 29.00 0.00 56.93 42.07

3-year Note 8/3 8/9 8/15 32.00 0.00

10-year Note 8/3 8/10 8/15 24.00 0.00

30-year Bond 8/3 8/11 8/15 16.00 0.00 24.43 47.57

5-year TIPS ® 8/11 8/18 8/31 12.00 2.00

2-year Note 8/18 8/23 8/31 35.00 0.00

5-year Note 8/18 8/24 8/31 35.00 0.00

7-year Note 8/18 8/25 8/31 29.00 0.00 57.37 53.63

3-year Note 9/1 9/6 9/15 32.00 0.00

10-year Note ® 9/1 9/7 9/15 21.00 0.00

30-year Note ® 9/1 9/8 9/15 13.00 0.00

10-year TIPS ® 9/15 9/22 9/30 11.00 0.00 0.00 77.00

2-year Note 9/22 9/27 9/30 35.00 0.00

5-year Note 9/22 9/28 9/30 35.00 0.00

7-year Note 9/22 9/29 9/30 29.00 0.00 57.84 41.16

537.00 196.57 340.43

Estimates are italicized. R = Reopening

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 405.43
#### Glenda H. GUM v. James Elmer GUM, Sr.

No. 9679.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

Dec. 4, 1973.

Robert E. Tillery, Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Raymond Gautreau and Glynn A. Long, ■ Donaldsonville, for plaintiff-appellee.

Houston C. Gascon, III, Plaquemine, for Movers.

Before LOTTINGER, BLANCHE and CRAIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was fixed for argument and all attorneys of record were notified. At *155the time scheduled for argument, the appellant was not present or represented, nor had any brief been filed on behalf of appellant, nor had any motion been filed for continuance.

On authority of Rule VII, Section 5(b), this Court, *Ex Proprio Motu,*considers said appeal as abandoned; therefore,

It is ordered, adjudged and decreed that this appeal be dismissed with prejudice.

Appeal Dismissed.
EXHIBIT 15.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to
the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-168890 on Form S-8 of our reports dated April 25, 2012, relating to the consolidated financial statements of AutoNavi Holdings Limited, its subsidiaries, its variable
interest entities (VIEs) and its VIEs subsidiaries (collectively, the Group) and the effectiveness of the Groups internal control over financial reporting appearing in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of AutoNavi
Holdings Limited for the year ended December 31, 2011.



|                                       
|---------------------------------------
|/s/ Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu CPA Ltd.  
|Beijing, the Peoples Republic of China
|April 25, 2012
Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Northeast Utilities (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), we, Michael G. Morris,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John H.
Forsgren, Vice Chairman, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Sec. 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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Michael G. Morris
    (Signature)
    Michael G. Morris
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer


/s/ John H. Forsgren
    (Signature)
    John H. Forsgren
    Vice Chairman, Executive Vice President and
    Chief Financial Officer

November 7, 2002
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2440 

To prohibit States from restricting a person from providing food or drink 

to individuals at a polling place in an election for Federal office, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 8, 2021 

Ms. WILD (for herself, Ms. WILLIAMS of Georgia, Mr. RASKIN, Ms. 

BARRAGA ́N, Mrs. HAYES, Ms. KUSTER, Mr. TAKANO, Ms. PINGREE, Mr. 

SUOZZI, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Mr. JONES, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mrs. 

DEMINGS, Mr. COOPER, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. SPEIER, and Ms. 

DELBENE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To prohibit States from restricting a person from providing 

food or drink to individuals at a polling place in an 

election for Federal office, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stay in Line To Vote 

5 Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2440 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITING STATES FROM RESTRICTING THE 

2 PROVISION OF FOOD OR DRINK TO INDIVID3 UALS AT A POLLING PLACE. 

4 (a) REQUIREMENT.—Subtitle A of title III of the 

5 Help America Vote Act of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 21081 et seq.) 

6 is amended— 

7 (1) by redesignating sections 304 and 305 as 

8 sections 305 and 306, respectively; and 

9 (2) by inserting after section 303 the following 

10 new section: 

11 ‘‘SEC. 304. PROHIBITING STATES FROM RESTRICTING THE 

12 PROVISION OF FOOD OR DRINK TO INDIVID13 UALS AT A POLLING PLACE. 

14 ‘‘A State may not prohibit a person from providing 

15 food or drink to individuals at a polling place in the State 

16 in an election for Federal office, including at a polling 

17 place at which individuals may cast ballots prior to the 

18 date of the election.’’. 

19 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT RELATING TO EN20 FORCEMENT.—Section 401 of the Help America Vote Act 

21 of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 21111) is amended by striking ‘‘and 

22 303’’ and inserting ‘‘303, and 304’’. 

23 (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents 

24 of such Act is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2440 IH

1 (1) by redesignating the items relating to sec2 tions 304 and 305 as relating to sections 305 and 

3 306, respectively; and 

4 (2) by inserting after the item relating to sec5 tion 303 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 304. Prohibiting States from restricting the provision of food or drink to 

individuals at a polling place.’’. 

6 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section and the amend7 ments made by this section shall take effect on the date 

8 of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 15

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS OF
COTTON STATES LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY:

We are aware of the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8: Nos. 33-30696, 333-00793, and 333-00795) of Cotton States Life
Insurance Company of our reports dated April 29, 2003 and August 6, 2003
relating to the unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements of
Cotton States Life Insurance Company that are included in its Form 10-Q for the
quarters ended March 31, 2003 and June 30, 2003.



                                                      /s/  Ernst & Young LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
August 6, 2003


                                        3
## St at e of Ne w York Supre me Court , Appe llat e D i vi s i on T h i rd J udi ci al D e

part me n t Decided and Entered: September 15, 2016 D-54-16

In the Matter of ATTORNEYS IN VIOLATION OF JUDICIARY LAW § 468-a.
COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STANDARDS, ON MOTION Petitioner; YOUNG HAM, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4111621)

Calendar Date: March 28, 2016 Before: McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Lynch, Rose and Mulvey, JJ.

Monica A. Duffy, Committee on Professional Standards, Albany, for petitioner. Young Ham, Los Angeles, California, respondent pro se.

Per Curiam. Respondent, who was admitted to practice by this Court in 2003, was suspended by this Court's order dated January 30, 2014 for failure to comply with the attorney registration requirements of Judiciary Law § 468-a (113 AD3d 1020 [2014]). Respondent now requests reinstatement on the ground that he has complied with the attorney registration requirements of Judiciary Law § 468-a and the Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (22 NYCRR) part 118. Petitioner does not object to-2- D-54-16

respondent's application. Respondent's application is granted and he is ordered reinstated, effective immediately. McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Lynch, Rose and Mulvey, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that respondent's application is granted; and it is further ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofContinental Materials Corporation on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 29, 2002as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Joseph J. Sum, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                      The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2)                      The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/   Joseph  J. Sum         |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                        |
| Joseph J. Sum                               |
| Vice President and Chief  Financial Officer |
|                                        |
| August 6, 2002                              |

 

----
#### Kate W. VINCENT, a free dealer, Appellant, v. Helen W. LAWSON and W. A. Lawson, her husband, Appellees.

No. 72-137.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 15, 1973.

Richard A. Lawrence, Sr., Melbourne, for appellant.

William J. Neale, of Neale & Sigman, Melbourne, for appellees.

WHITE, JOS. S., Associate Judge.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff who had obtained a foreclosure decree in the *163trial court, but which decree was vacated by the trial court upon defendant’s motion made several months subsequent to the entry of the decree, foreclosure sale of the property and the issuance of certificate of title to the plaintiff. With the motion to vacate the decree defendant tendered into court the full amount due on account of principal, interest, costs and attorney fees. The appeal is from the trial court’s order vacating the final decree, the foreclosure sale, and the certificate of title held by plaintiff.

Defendant’s motion to vacate was based upon the fact that shortly after institution of suit plaintiff and defendant agreed upon suspension of the proceedings if defendant would make certain periodical payments toward discharging a delinquency existing at the time of suit. Defendant argued that thereafter plaintiff could not lawfully resume action without first giving defendant notice of such an intention.

No responsive pleading was filed to the motion to vacate, but, nevertheless, a hearing was held at which time testimony on the motion was heard by the trial judge.

In reviewing this testimony we find a conflict existing regarding the exact terms of the agreement according to which defendant was to make payments and plaintiff was to suspend prosecution of the foreclosure proceedings. According to plaintiff’s version of the agreement, time of performance by defendant was the essence of the contract, whereas defendant said that the payment made on the occasion of the agreement would “stop the foreclosure” and that there was no “set time”, “not any specific time” for paying the balance; that defendant “would make payments as often as I could”.

Conflicts in testimony are to be reconciled by the trier of the facts; in this case, the trial judge. We are not authorized to reverse if there is substantial evidence in the record to support the conclusions of the trier of the facts.

The trial judge ruled that plaintiff should have notified defendant of a resumption of the foreclosure proceedings. If defendant’s version of the terms of the agreement is to be accepted, as the trial judge had a right to do, plaintiff, indeed, should have given notice, fixing a reasonable time in the future for compliance, in default of which prosecution of proceedings would be resumed.

The motion to vacate was filed September 27, 1971. Defendant testified that she first learned of the action taken by plaintiff on or about August 10, 1971. We find justification in the record for the action of the trial judge.

Affirmed.

REED, C. J., and CROSS, J., concur.
257 La. 270

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Louis RICHARD v. Louis M. SOWERS, Director, Department of Corrections, State of Louisiana et al.

No. 51048.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 5, 1971.

In re: Louis Richard applying for writ of habeas corpus and remedial writs.

Application denied.

The ruling is correct.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 239 (Friday, December 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 65432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32583]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 97N-0320]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of OMB 
Approval

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``Filing Objections and Requests for 
a Hearing on a Regulation or Order'' has been approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(the PRA).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JonnaLynn P. Capezzuto, Office of 
Information Resources Management (HFA-250), Food and Drug 
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-4659.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of August 6, 1997 
(62 FR 42257 to 42258), the agency announced that the proposed 
information collection had been submitted to OMB for review and 
clearance under section 3507 of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3507). An agency may 
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB 
control number. OMB has now approved the information collection and has 
assigned OMB control number 0910-0184. The approval expires on 
September 30, 2000.

    Dated: December 5, 1997.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.
[FR Doc. 97-32583 Filed 12-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Lacey Lynne Steddum , Appellant

No. 06

- 21

- 00089

- CR v.

The State of Texas , Appellee Appeal from the 188th District Court of Gregg County, Texas (Tr. Ct

. No. 51046

- A ). Memorandum Op inion delivered by

Chief Justice Morriss

, Justice Burgess and Justice Stevens participating

.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed

for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, Lacey Lynne Steddum , has adequately indicated h er inability

to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDE RED OCTOBER 20, 2021

BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey , Clerk
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF 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 the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Cox
Communications, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof, I,
James O. Robbins, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of
my knowledge:

      (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

                                   /s/ James O. Robbins
                                   Name: James O. Robbins
                                   Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
                                   Date: May 9, 2005

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other
documentation authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Cox Communications, Inc.
and will be retained by Cox Communications, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification "accompanies" the quarterly report on Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Cox Communications, Inc.
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the quarterly report
on Form 10-Q, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in
such filing).
#### Willie McDANIELS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. P-28.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 31, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 29, 1971.

Willie McDaniels, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joseph W. DeMember, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and the appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 23** **CONSENT    OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration    Statements on    Form S-3    (File    No. 333-122199    and    333-114739)    and    Form S-8    (File    No. 333-121140    and    333-105453)    of Cash Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated    February 28, 2006, which appears on    page F-2    of this annual report on    Form 10-K    for the year ended December 31, 2005.     /s/  VIRCHOW, KRAUSE & COMPANY, LLP     Minneapolis, Minnesota    March 16, 2006
Opinion filed September 22 , 2016



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

_____ _ _____



### No. 11

- 1 6

- 00 0 97

- C V

_____ _ _____



### MICHAEL HOLT AND FRANCES HODGES

, Appellant s

V.

HUNT OIL COMPANY AND JED DENSMAN

, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 118 th District Court

Martin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 6842

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The parties to this appeal have filed in this court a joint motion to dismis s with

prejudice

. T he parties state that they have resolved their dispute and have agreed to

dismiss all claims

. The parties request that we dismiss this appeal with prejudice

and tax costs against the party incurring the same. I n accordance with the parties’

request, we dismiss th is appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1.

The joint motion to dismiss with prejudice is granted, and th e appeal is

dismissed

.

September 22 , 201 6 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson , J., and Bailey , J.