alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-10867

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Michael Angelo Vasquez, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:20-CR-359-1

______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Michael Angelo 

Vasquez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Vasquez has not filed a response. We have 

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 27, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-10867 Document: 00516689500 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/27/2023
No. 22-10867

2

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for 

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. 

R. 42.2.

Case: 22-10867 Document: 00516689500 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/27/2023
EXHIBIT 99.2

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

FIA Card Services, National Association

BA Master Credit Card Trust II

The
undersigned, a duly authorized officer of FIA Card Services, National Association (formerly known as MBNA America Bank, National Association) (the Bank), as Servicer pursuant to the Amended and Restated Pooling and Servicing Agreement
dated as of June 10, 2006 (as amended from time to time, the Pooling and Servicing Agreement) by and between the Bank and The Bank of New York, as trustee (the Trustee) does hereby certify that:



|1. | The Bank is Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Trustee.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 3.05 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|4. | A review of the Servicers activities during the twelve-month period ended June 30, 2006 and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been made
under my supervision.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|5. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout
such twelve-month period.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 11th day of
August 2006.



|       |  |                          
|------ |  | -------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Marcie E. Copson-Hall
|Name:  |  | Marcie E. Copson-Hall    
|Title: |  | Senior Vice President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOUND ON PAGES 1 THROUGH 3 OF THE COMPANY'S
FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                            2629
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    16224
<ALLOWANCES>                                       724
<INVENTORY>                                      67068
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 87194
<PP&E>                                           56865
<DEPRECIATION>                                   10417
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  136594
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           103311
<BONDS>                                          11961
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                       21318
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    136594
<SALES>                                         163650
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                163650
<CGS>                                           149056
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   149056
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 12586
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                5454
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2916)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (1101)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1815)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1815)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.55)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.55)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 99.25



CONSENT OF ALFRED S. HAYDEN



March 27, 2013



Brigus Gold Corp.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission



Re: Brigus Gold Corp.



Ladies and Gentlemen:



I hereby consent to (i) the use of my name in connection with
the following documents and reports, which are either referenced in or filed as exhibits with the Annual Report on Form 40-F for
the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Form 40-F”) of Brigus Gold Corp. (the “Company”) to which this consent
relates: (A) the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report, Pre-feasibility Study, Brigus Gold Corp., Goldfields
Project, Saskatchewan, Canada” dated effective October 6, 2011 (the “Report”), (B) the Company’s Annual
Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2012 and (C) the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis for
the year ended December 31, 2012, (ii) the inclusion or incorporation by reference of information derived from the Report in the
Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-113889, 333-162558 and 333-167757), as amended, and Form F-10 (File No. 333-174604),
as amended, or any related abbreviated registration statement filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission
pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in any amendment to any of the foregoing, or to any prospectuses
or amendments or supplements thereto and (iii) all other references to the undersigned included or incorporated by reference in
the above-referenced Registration Statements and in any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto.



|Sincerely,               | 
|------------------------ | 
|                         | 
|/s/ Alfred S.
    Hayden | 
|Name: Alfred S. Hayden   |
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Eugene HARRIS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 53859.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 14, 1973.

In re: Eugene Harris applying for writs of habeas corpus and mandamus.

Writ denied. The application is moot since the trial court has held an eviden-tiary hearing.
259 La. 712

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. John FORD v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 51717.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 21, 1971.

In re: John Ford applying for writs of certiorari and habeas corpus.

Writ refused. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of our original or supervisory jurisdiction.
# Official Journal L 381/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 381 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4928 December 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 381

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4928 December 2006

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Regulation (EC) No 1986/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 regarding access to the Second Generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) by the services in the Member States responsible for issuing vehicle registration certificates | 1 |
| | * | Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) | 4 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

*

Regulation (EC) No 1986/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 regarding access to the Second Generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) by the services in the Member States responsible for issuing vehicle registration certificates

1

*

Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)

4

| | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Council |
| | * | Council Decision of 18 December 2006 concerning conclusion of the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the European Community on the coordination of energy-efficiency labelling programmes for office equipment | 24 |
| Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the European Community on the coordination of energy-efficiency labelling programs for office equipment | 26 |

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

Council

*

Council Decision of 18 December 2006 concerning conclusion of the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the European Community on the coordination of energy-efficiency labelling programmes for office equipment

24

Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the European Community on the coordination of energy-efficiency labelling programs for office equipment

26

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
261 La. 1046

#### John C. FUCHS, Jr. v. Edward LABRUYERE, Finance Director of the Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana.

No. 52450.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 18, 1972.

In re: John C. Fuchs, Jr. applying for writs of certiorari and/or mandamus or prohibition.

Writ denied: no error in refusing to hold finance director in contempt; whatever legal rights applicant has to contest the award of interest in the contempt proceedings are reserved.

SUMMERS, J.

I believe the contempt of the Finance Director should be enforced.

DIXON, J.,

dissents from the refusal to grant; there is no judgment in the record; the trial court and the court of appeal appear to have been in error.
<PAGE>   1











<TABLE>
<CAPTION>






                                                                      Exhibit 11


                            GENERAL HOST CORPORATION

              ADDITIONAL EARNINGS PER SHARE INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)

                    (In thousands, except per share amounts)

                                          Twelve Weeks Ended         Forty Weeks Ended
                                        November 2,  November 3,  November 2,  November 3,
                                           1997         1996         1997        1996
                                        ----------   ----------   ----------   ----------
<S>                                     <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>
Loss for full dilution:
  Loss from operations                  $ (17,800)   $ (14,873)   $  (14,475)  $ (11,422)
  Add interest on 8% Convertible
    Debentures, net of tax effect           1,200        1,200         4,000       4,000
                                        ---------    ---------     ---------   ---------
  Net loss, as adjusted                 $ (16,600)   $ (13,673)    $ (10,475)  $  (7,422)
                                        =========    =========     =========   =========



Shares used for calculating primary
  earnings per share                       24,414       24,414        24,414      24,414
  Additional shares resulting from
    assumed conversion of 8% Convertible
      Debentures                            7,611        7,611         7,611       7,611
  Additional shares resulting from
    assumed exercise of stock options          82            0           103           0
                                        ---------    ---------     ---------   ---------
                                           32,107       32,025        32,128      32,025
                                        =========    =========     =========   =========


Fully diluted loss per share            $    (.52)1  $    (.43)1   $    (.33)1 $    (.23)1
                                        =========    =========     =========   =========

</TABLE>


1        This calculation is submitted in accordance with Regulation S-K item
         601 (b)(11) although it is contrary to paragraph 40 of APB Opinion 15
         because it produces an anti-dilutive result.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                      $5,197,892
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            $5,213,476
<PP&E>                                         195,269
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              $5,733,870
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          $57,858
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       $18,698
<OTHER-SE>                                  $5,596,314
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                $5,733,870
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               $52,880
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 $513,017
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             ($513,017)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         ($513,017)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                ($377,142)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 983 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 983

     To amend The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act to provide disaster assistance for costs of operation of 
               a transit system during a major disaster.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 18, 1993

Mr. Lipinski (for himself, Mr. Dellums, Ms. Norton, and Mr. Blackwell) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                    Public Works and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act to provide disaster assistance for costs of operation of 
               a transit system during a major disaster.

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

SECTION 1. DISASTER ASSISTANCE FOR TRANSIT SYSTEM OPERATIONS.

    (a) Contributions.--Section 406(a)(1) of The Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172(a)(1)) is 
amended by inserting before the semicolon the following: ``and for 
revenue lost due to the inability of the State or local government to 
operate a transit system as a result of the major disaster''.
    (b) Community Disaster Loans.--The first sentence of section 417(a) 
of such Act (42 U.S.C. 5184(a)) is amended by inserting before the 
comma the following: ``(including losses associated with the operation 
of a transit system)''.

SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.

    The amendments made by section 1 shall apply with respect to a 
major disaster occurring on or after January 1, 1989.

                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 10.10
  CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE
 September 20, 2002
$1,000,000.00
    
    Fountain Valley, California
 Payor Company
 Payment
    Replacement of Note.
  1




---



##### 



Prepayment
 Covenants of Payor.
  Conversion.
  Representation and Warranties of the Company.
 Organization.
 Authorization.
 Consents.
 Unconditional Obligation: Fees, Waivers, Other.
  2




---



##### 



Miscellaneous.
        3




---



##### 



GBTZ BROS. & CO., INC.
    
    SUTURA, INC.a Delaware corporation
    
    a Delaware corporationBy:
    
    /s/ Ray Simkins
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Anthony A. NoblesName: Ray Simkins
    
    Name: Anthony A. NoblesTitle: President [ILLEGIBLE]
    
    Title: PRES./CEO
 4
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Gary Walter HENDERSON et al., Appellees.

No. 71-345.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 11, 1971.

*159Marvin U. Mounts, County Sol., and Daniel T. K. Hurley, Asst. County Sol., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Joseph A. Varón of Varón & Stahl, Hollywood, for appellee DeNarvaez.

Valentine Gabaldon of Altman & Gabal-don, Lake Worth, for appellee Breault.

FRANZA, ARTHUR J„ Associate Judge.

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order of the trial court granting a motion to suppress. The question before this court is:

> “whether the police’s error in failing to give appellees an exact duplicate of the original search warrant constitutes such error as to necessitate the suppression of the evidence.”

We reverse.

This opinion is narrowly limited to whether or not an unsigned and undated copy of the original search warrant left with the defendant necessitates the suppression of the evidence.

If an original search warrant was duly signed by the proper officer and was read to the defendant in toto before the search was commenced, the act of leaving an unsigned and undated duplicate of the original search warrant is solely an ad-ministerial act and not such error as would be prejudicial. State v. Featherstone, Fla.App.1971, 246 So.2d 597. Accordingly, the ruling of the trial court suppressing the evidence is reversed and this cause is hereby remanded to the trial court. This decision assumes that an original search warrant was duly issued by the proper officer pursuant to Officer Hobson’s testimony and that said warrant was read to the defendant in toto. The production of the original warrant and the reading of same rests upon and is the burden of the State to prove within the law upon the trial of this cause.

Absent the production of the original warrant at the trial, the trial court should suppress the evidence. See also United States v. Gross, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1956, 137 F.Supp. 244, and Evans v. United States, 6 Cir.1957, 242 F.2d 534.

Reversed and remanded.

WALDEN and OWEN, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Raymond C. Leonard, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this 10-K/A of Hyperdynamics Corporation;

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;

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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:



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



Date:
October 28, 2016



By:

/s/ RAYMOND C. LEONARDRaymond C. Leonard Principal Executive Officer


---



QuickLinks