alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-3051

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of South Dakota. Southy Thepmontry, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: September 6, 2006 Filed: September 14, 2006

___________ Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. After a jury found Southy Thepmontry guilty of conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, the district court 1 sentenced him to 200 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. On appeal, his counsel has move d to withdraw and f iled a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Thepmontry has filed a pro se supplemental brief. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel’s withdrawal motion.-2- Counsel argues that the district court erred by determining the drug quantity for which Thepmontry was responsible at sentencing because a key witness was not credible. We conclude that the district court did not clearly err. SeeAnderson v. City of Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 575 (1985) (dis trict court’s finding based on credibility determination is virtually never clear error so long as it is not internally inconsistent or based on testimony that is in coherent, implausible, or contradicted by objective evidence); United States v. Milton , 153 F.3d 891, 898 (8th Cir. 1998) (standard of review).
Turning to Thepmontry’s pro se arguments, we previously have rejected the contention that Guidelines enhancements must be charged in the indictment and proved to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Okai , 454 F.3d 848, 850-52 (8th Cir. 2006). We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by not appointing an interpreter at Thepmontry ’s competency examination. See Luna v. Black , 772 F.2d 448, 451 (8th Cir. 1985) (per curiam) (discussing when interpreter is required); Unite d States v. Coronel-Quintana , 752 F.2d 1284, 1291 (8th Cir. 1985) (standard of review). As to Th epmontry’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, it must be raised (if at all) in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez , 449 F.3d 824, 827 (8th Cir. 2006) (this court “will consider ineffective-assistance claims on di rect appeal only wher e the record has been fully developed, where not to act would amount to a plain miscarriage of justice, or where counsel’s error is readily apparent”).
Finally, after reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of th e district court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
Exhibit 10.33

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

NEENAH PAPER EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN

 

This FIRST AMENDMENT to the NEENAH PAPER EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN (as Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) (the “Plan”) is made by Neenah Paper, Inc. (the “Company”).

 

W I T N E S S E T H:

 

WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Plan, which is intended to qualify as an employee welfare benefit plan for severance benefits within the meaning of Section 3(1) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended; and

 

WHEREAS, the Company now wishes to amend the Plan to ensure compliance with Code Section 409A;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Company hereby amends the Plan, effective immediately, by adding the following to the end of Section 5.3:

 

“Notwithstanding any other provision in this Plan to the contrary, if a Participant is considered a ‘specified employee’ of the Company for purposes of Code Section 409A on the date of a Qualified Termination of Employment, any payment described in Section 5.1 that constitutes non-exempt ‘deferred compensation’ within the meaning of Code Section 409A that is otherwise due to the Participant as a result of such Participant’s ‘separation from service’ within the meaning of Code Section 409A during the six-month period immediately following such ‘separation from service’ shall be accumulated and paid to the Participant on the first day of the seventh month following such ‘separation from service’ (‘Delayed Payment Date’) to the extent necessary for the Participant to avoid adverse tax consequences or additional taxes under Code Section 409A, provided that if the Participant dies prior to the payment of such amounts, such amounts shall be paid to the personal representative of his estate on the first to occur of the Delayed Payment Date or 10 days following the date of Participant’s death.

 

Notwithstanding any other provision in this Plan to the contrary, if any payment described in Section 5.1 constitutes non-exempt ‘deferred compensation’ within the meaning of Code Section 409A, such payment, if due under the terms of the Plan, shall be paid on the sixtieth (60th) day following the Qualified Termination of Employment (which Qualified Termination of Employment, in the case of a Qualified Termination of Employment described in Section 2.20(B), shall occur at the date of the Change of Control).”

 

Except as specifically set forth above, the terms of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect as prior to this First Amendment.

 

1











 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this First Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer on the 17th day of December, 2012.

 

 

	
 
    	
NEENAH PAPER, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/   Richard Read
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Name:
    	
Richard   Read
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
VP   - Human Resources
    


 

2
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Paul Clark, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, hereby certify, that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of The Banker's Store,
Inc.;

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 statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by the 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 issuer as of,
and for, the periods presented in the report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and
internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the issuer and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the issuer is made known to me, particularly during the
period in which the periodic report is being prepared;

(b) designed such internal control over financial reporting to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report my 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 issuer's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the issuer's most recent fiscal quarter
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the issuer's auditors and to the issuer's board of
directors:

(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 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 issuer's internal control over
financial reporting.


                                    /s/ PAUL D. CLARK
                                    -----------------
                                    PAUL D. CLARK
                                    PRESIDENT, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                    AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICE

                                    APRIL 13, 2005
<PAGE>   1


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Post-Effective Amendment No. 3 to Form S-1 on Form S-3 No. 333-35663) for the
registration of 1,500,000 shares of common stock of NetMed, Inc. and in the
related Prospectus of our report dated January 29, 1999, except as to Note 14 as
to which the date is March 26, 1999, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of NetMed, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1998.

                                                        Ernst & Young LLP

Columbus, Ohio
March 30, 1999
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

JANET AND SCOTT BRUNERMER,

Petitioners

v.

APOLLO BOROUGH,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 286 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

JANET AND SCOTT BRUNERMER,

Petitioners

v.

APOLLO BOROUGH,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 287 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

JANET AND SCOTT BRUNERMER,

Petitioners

v.

APOLLO BOROUGH,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 288 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

JANET AND SCOTT BRUNERMER,

Petitioners

v.

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 289 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court
[286 WAL 2023, 287 WAL 2023, 288 WAL 2023 and 289 WAL 2023] - 2

APOLLO BOROUGH,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of April, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
_______________________________________ __ 

# Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

December 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 132052-53 & (79) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan EDWARD HARDGE, JR. and GWENDOLYN HARDGE Plaintiffs-Appellees, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 132052-3

WAYNE COUNTY, Defendant-Appellant. COA: 266780, 266808 Wayne CC: 04-414587-NI

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for l eave to file a brief amicus curiae is GRANTED. The application for leave to a ppeal the August 1, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DE NIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t1218 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 28, 2006

Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 34 (Thursday, February 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7748-7749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4111]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
[Docket No. PY-96-002]


Tentative Voluntary Poultry Grade Standards

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; extension of test-market period.

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

SUMMARY: On February 15, 1996, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) 
published a notice in the Federal Register (61 FR 5975) announcing a 
one-year test-market period for USDA grade identified cooked, boneless-
skinless poultry products without added ingredients, based on tentative 
grade standards. AMS is extending the test-market period beyond its 
scheduled end, February 15, 1997, until it makes a final determination 
about the tentative standards.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rex A. Barnes, Chief, Grading Branch, Poultry Division, 202-720-3271.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 15, 1996, the Agricultural 
Marketing Service (AMS) published a notice in the Federal Register 
(61 FR 5975) announcing a one-year test-market period for USDA 
grade identified cooked, boneless-skinless poultry products without 
added ingredients, based on tentative grade standards. The test-
market period is scheduled to end February 15, 1997, after which 
AMS will evaluate the test results. If AMS decides to amend the 
current poultry grade standards, a proposal with a comment period 
will be published in the Federal Register.

    AMS is currently evaluating the test-market results of two other 
sets of tentative grade standards for ready-to-cook products to 
determine if changes should be made to the standards. Those test-
markets were for boneless-skinless poultry legs and drumsticks (60 FR 
16428) and boneless-skinless poultry products without added ingredients 
(60 FR 30830), for which tentative standards were published in the 
Federal Register

[[Page 7749]]

on March 30, 1995, and June 12, 1995, respectively. AMS has determined 
that it is appropriate to extend the test-market period for cooked 
products until a final determination is made regarding changes to the 
standards for both ready-to-cook and cooked products. This will also 
allow additional time for the industry to utilize the tentative 
standards for cooked, boneless-skinless products.

    Dated: February 13, 1997.
Lon Hatamiya,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-4111 Filed 2-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
* 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.

REVISED APRIL 28, 2011

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10571

JOE ANN HAMILTON; ERNEST HAMILTON;

ALLEAN BROOKS, Individually and on Behalf of 

All Others Similarly Situated; CAROLYN JOHNSON,

Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated; 

KIMBERLY WILLIAMS-THOMPSON, Individually and on Behalf of 

All Others Similarly Situated; SUZANNA L. BROWN,

Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated; 

Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:07-CV-1442

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and BENAVIDES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 27, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk
No. 10-10571

2

This court recently affirmed the denial of class certification in a suit

involving title insurance premium discounts allegedly due under Texas law.

Benavides v. Chicago Title Insurance Co., No. 10-10136, 2011 WL 1107009 (5th

Cir. Mar. 23, 2011). Since the present case involves issues similar to those

addressed in Benavides, we VACATE the district court’s class certification order

and REMAND for reconsideration in light of Benavides. 

Without expressing a view on the merits of this case, we also caution

plaintiff’s counsel to avoid unnecessarily extending this litigation if Benavides

compels an end to it. See 28 U.S.C. § 1927. 

VACATED and REMANDED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KONATA MATTHEWS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 466 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KONATA MATTHEWS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 467 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KONATA MATTHEWS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 468 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM[ 466 EAL 2021, 467 EAL 2021 and 468 EAL 2021 ]

- 2

AND NOW , this 31st day of March, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<PAGE>


                                  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 Covista Communications, Inc. on Form
10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, A. John Leach, Jr.,
President and CEO of Covista Communications, Inc. certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that;

     1)  The 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 aspects, the financial condition and result of operations of
         Covista Communications, Inc.


Date: June 14, 2005                  By: /s/ A. John Leach, Jr.
                                         --------------------------------------
                                         A. John Leach, Jr.
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer
**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 Monster Beverage Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), the undersigned, Hilton H. Schlosberg, Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors, President, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

 
| Date:  | April 13, 2017 | /s/   Hilton H. Schlosberg                                                                                             |   |
|--------|---------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                | Hilton   H. Schlosberg                                                                                                 |
|   |                | Vice Chairman of   the Board of Directors, President, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial   Officer and Secretary |

 

----
Exhibit 23

                 Consent of Independent Public Accountants
    As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference of our reports dated November 9, 1998 (except
with respect to the matter discussed in Note 17, as to which the date is
November 24, 1998), included in or incorporated by reference into Thermo
Ecotek Corporation's Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 3, 1998,
into the Company's previously filed Registration Statement on Form S-8
(No. 33-91538), Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-91542),
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-91546), Registration Statement
on Form S-8 (No. 33-91544), Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No.
33-91548), and Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-80753).



                                               Arthur Andersen LLP



Boston, Massachusetts
January 8, 1999
#### Terry Wayne JENKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-782.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 22, 1971.

Leornard L. Stafford, Public Defender, and Michael H. Gora, Asst. Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles W. Musgrove, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See State v. Owens, Fla.1970, 233 So.2d 389; State v. Wright, Fla.1969, 224 So.2d 300.

WALDEN and CROSS, JJ„ and ADAMS, ALTO, Associate Judge, concur.
**Exhibit 10.1(bd)**

** **

**THIRD AMENDMENT**

**TO**

**THE SAUER-DANFOSS EMPLOYEES’RETIREMENT PLAN**

**(AsAmended and Restated, Effective January 1, 2000**

**andRenamed As of May 3, 2000)**

 

                Byvirtue and in exercise of the amending power reserved to Sauer Danfoss Company(the “Company”) by subsection 16.2 of the Sauer-Danfoss Employees’ RetirementPlan (As Amended and Restated, Effective January 1, 2000 and Renamed As of May3, 2000) (the “Plan”), and pursuant to the authority delegated to theundersigned officer of the Company by the Employee Benefit Committee of theCompany, the Plan is hereby amended, effective as of January 1, 2001, byadding the following phrase immediately after “or 414(h)(12) in the firstsentence of Section 11.8:

                                “, andeffective January 1, 2001, Code Section 132(f)(4);”

 

 

 

                **IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, the above amendment is adopted this 25thday of February, 2002.

 
|   | **SAUER  DANFOSS (US) COMPANY** |
|--------|---------------------------------|
|   |                            |   |
|   |                            |   |
|   | By:                             | /s/ KENNETH D. McCUSKEY |   |
|   |                            |   |
|   | Its:                            | Vice  President Finance |   |

 

----