alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 41182 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
MARGARITO CHAVEZ

- TREJO , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:15

- CR

- 297

- 1

Before REAVLEY, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Margarito Chavez

Trejo 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). Chavez

- Trejo h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 20 , 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-41182 Document: 00513472503 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2016No. 15

- 41182

2 issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to wit hdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 15-41182 Document: 00513472503 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2016
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO CATTLE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT 

THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO CATTLE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (“First Amendment”) is made and entered into as of November 7, 2014 by and between
JBS Food Canada Inc., a Canadian Corporation, (“JBS Canada”) and J&F Ranch Canada Inc., a Canadian Corporation, (“J&F Canada”). 

RECITALS 
 A. JBS Canada and J&F
Canada have entered into that certain Cattle Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of January 24, 2013 (the “Agreement”); and 
 B. JBS
Canada and J&F Canada desire to amend the Agreement to extend the term of the Agreement past July 1, 2016. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
foregoing and the mutual covenants and agreement contained herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 
  

	 	(a)	Section 10 of the Agreement is amended by deleting “July 1, 2016” where it appears and replacing it with “December 31, 2019”. 


 

	 	(b)	Other than as set forth in this First Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

  

	 	(c)	The Agreement, as amended by this First Amendment, constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the matters set forth in the Agreement, as amended by this First Amendment and supersedes any prior
understanding or agreement, oral or written, with respect to such matters. 

  

	 	(d)	This First Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 


 

	 	(e)	This First Amendment shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Alberta without giving effect to any choice or conflict of laws rule or provision that would cause the application of
the domestic substantive laws of any other jurisdiction. 

 [Signature page follows.] 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, JBS Canada and J&F Canada have executed this First Amendment to the Agreement as of the
date first written above. 
  

			
	JBS Food Canada Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Denilson Molina

		 	  

		
	Name:	 	 DENILSON MOLINA

		
	Its:	 	 CFO

	
	J&F Ranch Canada Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Luke Lind

		 	  

		
	Name:	 	 Luke Lind

		
	Its:	 	 Vice President




  
 –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 Quarterly Report of Energy Edge Technologies Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officers knowledge:  (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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.     Dated:  May 20, 2011 By:/s/ Joe Ragosta Joe Ragosta Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER>  1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                    15,592,010
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                     9,522,187
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>               30,991,285
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                    18,024,581
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                      17,114,381
<LOANS>                                  336,049,907
<ALLOWANCE>                                1,306,381
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           410,145,845
<DEPOSITS>                               304,834,455
<SHORT-TERM>                              75,000,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          862,523
<LONG-TERM>                                  105,567
<COMMON>                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                               26,655,381
<OTHER-SE>                                 2,687,919
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           410,145,845
<INTEREST-LOAN>                           25,274,397
<INTEREST-INVEST>                          3,175,011
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                          28,449,408
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                        12,837,966
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        16,421,791
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                     12,027,617
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                210,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                           161,365
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                            8,885,204
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            4,160,021
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                 4,160,021
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                               2,680,430
<EPS-BASIC>                                   0.95
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0.90
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                  3.20
<LOANS-NON>                                  266,692
<LOANS-PAST>                                 933,679
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                           1,178,242
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                 94,034
<RECOVERIES>                                  12,173
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                          1,306,381
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                    1,306,381


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1



WRITTEN STATEMENT

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Annual Report of Comtech Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Jeffrey Kang, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company certifies, 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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: March 31, 2005



By:

/s/    Jeffrey KangJeffrey KangChairman and Chief Executive Officer
| (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/ Kevin Landis        |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Kevin Landis            |   |
| Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                    |   |
| /s/ Omar Billawala      |   |
| Omar Billawala          |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |
#### CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, Appellant, v. Janie Bell JONES, Appellee.

No. K-105.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Aug. 8, 1968.

William M. Madison, Claude L. Mullis, Frederick J. Simpson, Jacksonville, and Chester G. Senf, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Schneider & Dunay, Jacksonville, for ap-pellee.

RAWLS, Acting Chief Judge.

By this interocutory appeal, the City of Jacksonville contends that the trial judge erred in denying its motion to dissolve a writ of garnishment.

The sole point on appeal is: Does Section 61.12, Florida Statutes F.S.A., change the law of Florida which holds that garnishment does not lie against a municipality ?

Section 61.12, Florida Statutes, reads:

> “So much as the court orders of the money or other things due to any person or public officer, state or county, whether the head of a family residing in this state or not when the money or other thing is due for the personal labor or service of the person or otherwise, is subject to attachment or garnishment to enforce the orders of the courts of this state for alimony, suit money or support, or other orders in actions for divorce or alimony; * *

The public policy of this state requires that judicial orders providing for payment of child support be enforceable. Otherwise, the children for whose benefit the *260orders are rendered might well become public charges. By the subject enactment, the legislature authorized garnishment against funds owed by the sovereign, i. e., the State of Florida; and having taken this action, it is our construction that the statute intended to remove any immunity from garnishment inuring to the sovereign’s child, i. e., the municipality.

The interlocutory appeal is dismissed.

JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
#### UVESCO, INCORPORATED, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Howard C. PETERSEN et al., Appellees.

No. 73-146.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Feb. 15, 1973.

Petition for Constitutional Stay Writ denied.
Exhibit 31-21**FORM 10-K CERTIFICATION**I, Anthony F. Earley, Jr., certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of The Detroit Edison Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. (Intentionally omitted)  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.     /s/ ANTHONY F. EARLEY, JR. Date: March 7, 2006   Anthony F. Earley, Jr.    Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive    Officer of The Detroit Edison Company
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1

                   [PILLSBURY MADISON & SUTRO LLP LETTERHEAD]

                               September 13, 2000

Trega Biosciences, Inc.
9880 Campus Point Drive
San Diego, California 92121

         Re:  Registration Statement on Form S-8

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         With reference to the Registration Statement on Form S-8 to be filed by
Trega Biosciences, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), with the
Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
relating to an additional 2,500,000 shares of the Company's Common Stock which
may be issuable pursuant to the Company's 1996 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended
and restated (the "Stock Plan"), it is our opinion that such shares of the
Common Stock of the Company, when issued and sold in accordance with the Stock
Plan, will be duly authorized, legally issued, fully paid and nonassessable.

         We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion with the Securities and
Exchange Commission as Exhibit 5.1 to the Registration Statement.

                                         Very truly yours,

                                         /s/ PILLSBURY MADISON & SUTRO LLP


                                      -6-
Exhibit 4.1


 


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


2 HANSON PLACE, 12TH FLOOR, BROOKLYN,
N.Y. 11217


 


 


 


November 22, 2016


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


Smart Trust 281


 


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for the series of Smart Trust set forth above (the “Trust”). We enclosed a list
of the Securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our evaluation of such
Securities as of close of business on November 21, 2016, in accordance with the valuation method set forth in the Standard Terms
and Conditions of Trust and Trust Agreement. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing
the evaluations of the Trust Securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-213461) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
with respect to the registration of the sale of the Trust Units and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO                      


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
**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 Quarterly Report of Modern Mobility Aids, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Valeri Politika, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

| (3) |   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                 |
|-----|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (4) |   | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

 

 

| Dated: May 11, 2011 | By:    | /s/ Valeri Politika                                              |
|---------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                |   | Valeri Politika

Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer) |

 

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7663

DE’ANTE OCTARIO HOWARD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

KENNETH E. LASSITER,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, 

Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:12-cv-00453-WO-LPA)

Submitted: January 21, 2014 Decided: January 24, 2014

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

De’Ante Octario Howard, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe 

DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

De’Ante Octario Howard seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate 

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Howard has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny his motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 11

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                    THE DELTONA CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

                COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE



                                                                  Years Ended
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       December 31,  December 31,  December 31,  December 31, December 31,
                                          2000          1999          1998          1997         1996
                                       ------------  ------------  ------------  -----------  ------------


<S>                                    <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>          <C>
Computation of primary income (loss)
 per common share(a):

Loss before extraordinary item .....   $   (1,042)   $     (367)   $   (2,591)   $   (1,326)   $(1,227)
                                       ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    =======

Net income (loss) ..................   $   (1,042)   $     (367)   $   (2,591)   $   (1,326)   $  (896)
                                       ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    =======

Net income (loss) applicable
  to common stock ..................   $   (1,042)   $     (367)   $   (2,591)   $   (1,326)   $  (896)
                                       ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    =======

Total weighted average common shares
  outstanding ......................       13,544        13,544        13,544         6,754      6,730
                                       ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    =======


Per Common Share Data:
  Loss before extraordinary items ..   $     (.08)   $     (.03)   $     (.19)   $     (.20)   $  (.18)
                                       ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    =======


  Net income (loss) ................   $     (.08)   $     (.03)   $     (.19)   $     (.20)   $  (.13)
                                       ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    =======




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

     (a)   Earnings per common share assuming full dilution was
           approximately the same for all periods.


</TABLE>
Blueprint








  EXHIBIT
10.2







 


FUNDING
COMMITMENT LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2016


 


 


Dear
Mr. Rositano, please let this letter serve as a commitment letter
for Coventry Enterprises, LLC to commit to fund the following
amounts into Friendable, Inc. (the “Company”) in
connection with a Securities Purchase Agreement dated October 7,
2016, as amended, by and among the Company and Alpha Capital
Anstalt.


 


 


	

Date

	

Amount

	

Net
Amount


	

On or
prior to December 5, 2016

	

$88,000

	

$84,000


	

On or
prior to January 4, 2017

	

$84,000

	

$80,000







 


Sincerely,


 


 


Coventry
Enterprises, LLC


 



/s/ Jack Bodenstein






By:
Jack Bodenstein


 


Title:
Manager


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 




_____


Company
Initials