alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FTC Form 232 (rev 7/11)

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20580

CASE NAME FILE/DOCKET NUMBER

Pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, I (we) am (are) entering in the above 

proceeding the appearance of

□ counsel supporting the complaint (Complete Items 1, 3, 4, and 5 below)

□ counsel or representative for the respondent (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below)

□ counsel or representative for a third party (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below)

1. COUNSEL OR REPRESENTATIVE 2. RESPONDENT(S) OR THIRD PARTY(IES)

Include the name, address, email address, and telephone 

number of each counsel or representative entering an 

appearance in the above proceeding,

Include the address and telephone numbers of all persons, 

partnerships, corporations, or associations on whose behalf 

this Notice of Appearance is being filed.

3. ASSOCIATE/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

4. SIGNATURE OF SENIOR COUNSEL 5. DATE SIGNED

Return this form to: Federal Trade Commission

Room H-113

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

john bernard duler (president)

jbduler@californianaturel.com

california natural

480 gate 5 road, suite 114

sausalito, CA 94965

Phone Number: 415-579-2164

California Naturel, Inc. 5/6/2016

john bernard duler

jbduler@californianaturel.com

california naturel

480 gate 5 road, suite 114

sausalito, CA 94965

Phone Number: 415-579-2164

D09370 (None)

05 06 2016

582565
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jerry Richardson, Appellant.

[735 NYS2d 772]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Stackhouse, J.), rendered July 6, 2000, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to three concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. Defendant’s claim that it was insufficient for the arresting officer to testify that defendant met the descriptions provided by the undercover officers is unpreserved *(see, People v Tutt,*38 NY2d 1011), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that probable cause was established because the details of the descriptions were elicited *(People v Cintron,*232 AD2d 192, *lv denied*89 NY2d 863).

*298The court’s *Sandoval*ruling limited the prosecutor’s inquiry to the fact of defendant’s 12 most recent misdemeanor convictions as well as one felony conviction. Although, as is conceded, the prosecutor’s cross-examination went beyond the parameters of the court’s ruling, this limited questioning was harmless given the overwhelming proof of defendant’s guilt *(see, People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230), which included the recovery of prerecorded buy money and additional drugs from defendant. Moreover, the court repeatedly cautioned the jury that these convictions were to be considered only as to the issues of credibility, not propensity. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Sullivan and Ellerin, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7460 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.7460

                     One Hundred Sixteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and twenty

                                 An Act

 
    To extend the authority for the establishment by the Peace Corps 
  Commemorative Foundation of a commemorative work to commemorate the 
 mission of the Peace Corps and the ideals on which the Peace Corps was 
                    founded, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Peace Corps Commemorative Work 
Extension Act''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMEMORATIVE WORK 
TO COMMEMORATE THE MISSION OF THE PEACE CORPS AND THE IDEALS ON WHICH 
THE PEACE CORPS WAS FOUNDED.
    Notwithstanding section 8903(e) of title 40, United States Code, 
the authority to establish the commemorative work under section 1(a) of 
Public Law 113-78 (40 U.S.C. 8903 note; 128 Stat. 647) shall continue 
to apply through January 24, 2028.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-91,336-01

EX P ARTE DAVID NOE SANCHEZ, Applicant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 11-CRD- 30-A IN THE 229 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM DUV AL COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant was convicted of injury to a child and sentenc ed to forty -five y ear s ’ imprisonment. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habea s corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk f

orwa rded it to this Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. On J une 12, 2020, the trial court schedule d a hear ing to be held on J une 18, 2020. The rec ord contains no order desig nating issues, so the district cler k proper ly forwa

rded this application to this Court under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedur e 7 3
. 4 ( b)(5)
. Howeve r, the application was forwa rded befor e the trial court made finding s of fac t a nd conclusions of law. We r emand this applica tion to the trial court to complete its evidentiar y investiga tion and make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law.The trial court shall make findings o f fac t and conclusions of l aw within ninety day s from

the date of this order
. The district cler k shall then immediately forwa rd to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the rec ord develope d on rema nd, including, among other things, aff idavits, motions, objections, proposed finding s and conclusions, order s, and tran scripts from hear ings and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 4). Any extensions of time must be reque sted by the trial cour

t and obtained f

rom this Court.
Filed: September

16, 2020 Do not publish
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.20


                                   EXHIBIT A
                                   ---------

                                PROMISSORY NOTE

$15,187.50                                                        March 5, 1999



For value received, the undersigned promises to pay to TheraSense, Inc., a
California corporation (the "Company"), or order, at its principal office the
principal sum of $15,187.50 without interest. Said principal shall be due on the
earlier of March 5, 2003, or (ii) the undersigned's termination of
employment with or services to the Company.

Should suit be commenced to collect this Note or any portion thereof, such sum
as the Court may deem reasonable shall be added hereto as attorneys' fees. The
maker waives presentment for payment, protest, notice of protest, and notice of
non-payment of this Note.

This Note is secured by a pledge of 60,750 shares of Common Stock of the
Company, pursuant to the provisions of the Common Stock Purchase and Security
Agreement between the Company and the undersigned executed contemporaneously
with this Note.

The holder of this Note shall have full recourse against the maker, and shall
not be required to proceed against the Shares or other collateral securing this
Note in the event of default.

                                             /s/ Charlie Liamos
                                             ---------------------------
                                             Charlie Liamos
#### LAFOURCHE PARISH WATER DISTRICT NO. ONE v. CARL HECK ENGINEERS, INC.

No. 60134.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 16, 1977.

In re: Lafourche Parish Water District No. One applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of Lafourche. 346 So.2d 769.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the court of appeal, the result is correct.
No. 00-832.

No. 00-843.

#### National Cable & Telecommunications Assn., Inc. *v.*Gulf Power Co. et al.; and Federal Communications Commission et al. *v.*Gulf Power Co. et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. [Certiorari granted, *ante,*p. 1125.] Motion of the Acting Solicitor General to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6651

WARREN FLETCHER-EL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RICHARD LANHAM, Commissioner; FRANK C. SIZER,

JR., Warden,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.

(CA-98-4088-WMN)

Submitted: October 21, 1999 Decided: October 27, 1999

Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Warren Fletcher-El, Appellant Pro Se. David Phelps Kennedy, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief on

his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Fletcher-El v. Lanham, No. CA-98-4088-WMN (D.

Md. Apr. 30, 1999). 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
EXHIBIT 32.02

Certification of Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
Furnished 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 Versant Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jerry Wong, as Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby 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.

|                                                                                               |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ Jerry Wong Jerry Wong
Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
January 14, 2009 |  | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Richard BROWN v. Harold M. TERRY, Sheriff of Caddo Parish.

No. 61680.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 17, 1978.

In re: Richard Brown, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of Caddo.

Writ denied.
| Area Code/County                    | Count |
|-------------------------------------|-------|
| 339  Massachusetts                  | 928   |
| 351  Massachusetts                  | 107   |
| 413  Massachusetts                  | 7306  |
| 508  Massachusetts                  | 17820 |
| 617  Massachusetts                  | 19571 |
| 774  Massachusetts                  | 4473  |
| 781  Massachusetts                  | 10747 |
| 857  Massachusetts                  | 4641  |
| 978  Massachusetts                  | 13098 |
| Barnstable Massachusetts            | 3232  |
| Berkshire Massachusetts             | 2103  |
| Bristol Massachusetts               | 5022  |
| Dukes Massachusetts                 | 551   |
| Essex Massachusetts                 | 8616  |
| Franklin Massachusetts              | 1045  |
| Hampden Massachusetts               | 3297  |
| Hampshire Massachusetts             | 2176  |
| Middlesex Massachusetts             | 21458 |
| Nantucket Massachusetts             | 197   |
| Norfolk Massachusetts               | 8766  |
| No Zip Code Reported, Massachusetts | 413   |
| Plymouth Massachusetts              | 5007  |
| Suffolk Massachusetts               | 6609  |
| Worcester Massachusetts             | 8823  |
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA

No. 358A12

FILED 13 JUNE 2013

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

v.

BRYANT LAMONT BOYD

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel 

of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 730 S.E.2d 193 (2012), on remand from 

this Court, ___ N.C. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (2012), vacating defendant’s conviction for 

second-degree kidnapping that resulted in part in a judgment entered on 14 April

2010 by Judge Abraham Penn Jones in Superior Court, Orange County, and 

ordering a new trial on the charge of second-degree kidnapping. Heard in the

Supreme Court on 11 March 2013.

Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy

Attorney General, for the State-appellant.

Staples S. Hughes, Appellate Defender, by Andrew DeSimone, Assistant 

Appellate Defender, for defendant-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the reasons stated in the 

dissenting opinion, and this case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for 

consideration of the remaining issues.
STATE V. BOYD

Opinion of the Court

-2-

REVERSED AND REMANDED.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.7

               [Please return this page in the enclosed envelope]

                          CB RICHARD ELLIS 401(K) PLAN

                   Election to Invest in Class A Common Stock
                             of CBRE Holding, Inc.

   I hereby instruct U. S. Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee of the CBRE Holding
Common Stock Fund, to carry out the investment election indicated below,
subject to the conditions set forth in the Trustee's notice to 401(k) Plan
participants that accompanied this election.

   I hereby elect to have (check one):

    [_]$                 from my 401(k) Plan account balances (not to
       exceed 50% as of June 1, 2001) invested in Class A common stock of
       CBRE Holding, Inc.

    [_]        % of my 401(k) Plan account balances on June 1, 2001 (not to
       exceed 50%) invested in Class A common stock of CBRE Holding, Inc.

    [_]No portion of my 401(k) Plan account invested in Class A common
       Stock of CBRE Holding, Inc.

                                          PARTICIPANT:

                                          _____________________________________
                                          Print Name

                                          _____________________________________
                                          Phone or E-mail Contact Information

                                          _____________________________________
                                          Social Security Number

                                          _____________________________________
                                          Signature
Concurring Statement of Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen 

Staff Cross-Device Tracking Report 

January 23, 2017 

On January 20, 2017, the Commission voted to permit staff to issue a report entitled “CrossDevice Tracking.” 

The FTC has a long history of carefully and thoughtfully evaluating the potential privacy impacts 

of new technologies. For example, the 2009 Self-Regulatory Behavioral Advertising Report 

explored online behavioral advertising.1

 That Report was the culmination of a three-year process 

that started with the issuance for public comment of a set of proposed self-regulatory principles, 

followed by a public discussion of the issues in a town hall. The Commission staff’s final 

guidance reflected feedback from more than sixty commenters. 

The Behavioral Advertising Report addressed many of the same issues raised by the cross-device 

linking discussed in today’s report. As was the case with behavioral advertising when it was 

new, consumers may not expect cross-device linking. The Behavioral Advertising Report noted 

that consumers might be surprised if their activity on one website informed advertisements on a 

different website. Likewise, today’s report notes that consumers might be surprised if their 

activity on one device informed advertising on another device. As such, today’s report does not 

alter the FTC’s longstanding privacy principles but simply discusses their application in the 

context of a new technology. 

1

 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION STAFF, SELF-REGULATORY PRINCIPLES FOR ONLINE BEHAVIORAL ADVERTISING 

(2009), https://www.ftc.gov/reports/federal-trade-commission-staff-report-self-regulatory-principles-onlinebehavioral. 

1
#### Ralph Maxwell LOWERY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. R-24.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Jan. 25, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
WINTHROP
REALTY TRUST                      
FORM 10-Q - MARCH 31, 2007

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection  with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of Winthrop  Realty Trust (the
Company) for the three months ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  Report),  I, Thomas C. Staples, Chief
Financial Officer,  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  respects,  the
financial  condition and                   results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|             |                        
|------------ | -----------------------
|             |                        
|By:          | /s/ Thomas C. Staples  
|             |                        
|Name:        | Thomas C. Staples      
|             | Chief Financial Officer
|             |                        
|May 11, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000036548
<NAME> FIRST MORTGAGE CORP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                         545,287
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  125,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          50,662
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 720,949
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           53,631
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        51,102
<OTHER-SE>                                     616,216
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   720,949
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               264,063
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                96,689
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                167,374
<INCOME-TAX>                                    53,631
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            113,743
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   113,743
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .002
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Statements of Operations and Balance Sheets and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           5,267
<SECURITIES>                                    14,716
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,350
<ALLOWANCES>                                       603
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   198
<PP&E>                                           3,999
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,324
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,688
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,001
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,889
<OTHER-SE>                                    (21,615)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,688
<SALES>                                         18,393
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,393
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,131
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,151
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (58)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,540
<INCOME-TAX>                                       129
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,411
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,411
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.18
        

</TABLE>
261 La. 221

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Erwin Paul WILLINGHAM v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 52202.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 22, 1972.

In re: Erwin Paul Willingham applying for writ of habeas corpus.

Writ denied. On the basis of the evi-dentiary hearing, we find the plea of guilty of Sept. 1, 1966 to have been entered freely and voluntarily and after intelligent waiver of counsel.