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 ChavezTrejo 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 has 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 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 20, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-41182 Document: 00513472503 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2016
No. 15-41182

2

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: 15-41182 Document: 00513472503 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2016
Exhibit 23.2



                      DASZKAL, BOLTON, MANELA, DEVLIN & CO.
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                   A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS

       2401 N.W. BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, SUITE 100 BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33431
                   TELEPHONE (561) 367-1040 FAX (561) 750-3236



JEFFREY A. BOLTON, CPA, P.A.                    MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE
MICHAEL I. DASZKAL, CPA, P.A.                   OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
ROBERT A. MANELA, CPA, P.A.
TIMOTHY R. DEVLIN. CPA, P.A.
MICHAEL S. KRIDEL, CPA, P.A.






CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Forms S-8 Nos. 33-78296,33-84554, and 33-11765) of Hydron
Technologies, Inc. and the related prospectuses of our audit report dated March
23, 2001 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets at December 31, 2000
and 1999 and consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity and
cash flows of Hydron Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiaries then ended in the
form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000.





                                /s/ Daszkal, Bolton, Manela, Devlin & Co., CPA's


Boca Raton, Florida
May 2, 2001

                                       10
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000911115
<NAME> ATCHISON CASTING CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           5,932
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   95,572
<ALLOWANCES>                                       584
<INVENTORY>                                     61,804
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               189,636
<PP&E>                                         203,475
<DEPRECIATION>                                  61,108
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 377,265
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          177,842
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            83
<OTHER-SE>                                     138,869
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   377,265
<SALES>                                        468,301
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               468,301
<CGS>                                          413,893
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  456,982
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,308
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   855
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,452
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,296)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (10,752)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,456
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,456
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .32


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 23.6


                      CONSENT OF SALOMON SMITH BARNEY INC.

     We hereby consent to the use of our name and to the description of our
opinion letter, dated August 16, 2000, under the captions "Summary", "Special
Factors--Background of the Merger", "Special Factors--Opinion of Financial
Advisor to the Board of Directors of dELiA*s" and "Special
Factors--Recommendation of the dELiA*s Board of Directors" in, and to the
inclusion of such opinion letter as Appendix D to, the Joint Proxy
Statement/Prospectus of dELiA*s Inc. and iTurf Inc., which Joint Proxy
Statement/Prospectus is part of the Registration Statement on Form S-4
(File Number________) of iTurf Inc.  By giving such consent we do not
thereby admit that we are experts with respect to any part of such
Registration Statement within the meaning of the term "expert" as used in,
or that we come within the category of persons whose consent is required
under, the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the rules and regulations
of the Securities and Exchange Commission promulgated thereunder.

                                                  /s/ SALOMON SMITH BARNEY INC.


New York, New York
August 24, 2000
#### Jesse LEE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-146.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 22, 1970.

Appeal from Criminal Court, Orange County; Warren H. Edwards, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Karen Anne Krupp, wife of James R. SUTTERFIELD v. James R. SUTTERFIELD.

No. 61816.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 7, 1978.

In re: Karen Krupp Sutterfield applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. 354 So.2d 707.

Writ denied.

TATE, DIXON and CALOGERO, JJ, would grant.

TATE, J.,

notes that the tort cause factor for abuse of process is independently available to the relator, in his opinion.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### May 30, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 130327 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STAT E OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 130327 COA: 261232 Chippewa CC: 04-007738-FH COREY LAMONT HARRIS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to a ppeal the October 11, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

p0522 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.

May 30, 2006

Clerk
**Exhibit 32.1**

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

Each of the undersigned, in his capacity as an officer of CubicCorporation hereby certifies pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002 that:

1.               The annual report of Cubic Corporation (the “Registrant”)on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2006 (the “Report”), whichaccompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

2.               The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Registrantat the end of such year and the results of operations of the Registrant forsuch year.

| /s/ W. J. Zable          |                    | /s/ W.W. Boyle |   |
|--------------------------|-------------------------|----------------|--------|
| W. J. Zable              | W. W. Boyle             |
| Chief Executive  Officer | Chief Financial Officer |
|                     |                    |
| Date: December  5, 2006  |                    |

 

----
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3524

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to permit the continued insurance of deposits in minority- and women-owned banks by the Bank

Deposit Financial Assistance Program.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 17, 1993

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas (for herself, Mr. WATT, Mr. LEWIS

of Georgia, Mr. WASHINGTON, Mr. MFUME, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Mr.

HILLIARD, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, Mr. FORD of

Tennessee, Mr. REYNOLDS, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mr. SCOTT, Mr. CLYBURN,

Mrs. COLLINS, of Illinois, Mr. BISHOP, Mr. WHEAT, Mr. TOWNS, Ms.

NORTON, Mr. TUCKER, Mr. FIELDS of Louisiana, Mr. PAYNE of New

Jersey, Miss COLLINS of Michigan, Mr. OWENS, Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr.

HASTINGS, Mrs. MEEK, Mr. STOKES, Mr. WYNN, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. RUSH,

Mr. DIXON, Mr. JEFFERSON, and Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs

A BILL

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to permit the

continued insurance of deposits in minority- and womenowned banks by the Bank Deposit Financial Assistance

Program.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3524 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Bank Deposit Insur3 ance Amendments of 1993’’.

4 SEC. 2. BANK DEPOSIT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Effective December 19, 1993, sec6 tion 7(i) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C.

7 1817(i)) is amended—

8 (1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as para9 graph (4); and

10 (2) by inserting after paragraph (2), the follow11 ing new paragraph:

12 ‘‘(3) BANK DEPOSIT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

13 PROGRAM.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), funds

14 deposited by an insured depository institution pursu15 ant to the Bank Deposit Financial Assistance Pro16 gram of the Department of Energy shall be sepa17 rately insured in an amount not to exceed $100,000

18 for each insured depository institution depositing

19 such funds.’’.

20 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—

21 Section 11(a)(1)(C) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act

22 (12 U.S.C. 1821(a)(1)(C)) is amended by striking ‘‘sec23 tion 7(i)(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph 1 or (2) of section

24 7(i) or any funds described in section 7(i)(3)’’.

Æ
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 28, 2014

No. 04-14-00095-CR

Jesus PADILLA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 6, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 394254

Honorable Wayne A. Christian, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant has filed a motion for the appointment of appellate counsel. Our records 

reflect that the trial court previously found appellant to be indigent and appointed counsel to 

represent him. After appellant’s conviction and sentence, counsel filed a motion to withdraw 

which was granted. A defendant who is determined by the court to be indigent is presumed to 

remain indigent throughout the proceedings in the case, including appeal. See TEX. CODE CRIM.

PROC. ANN. art. 26.04(p) (presumption of indigence absent a showing of material change in 

defendant’s financial circumstances).

Accordingly, this appeal is ABATED to the trial court and the trial court is ORDERED to 

appoint counsel to represent appellant on appeal. See Duncan v. State, 653 S.W.2d 38, 40 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1983) (holding that appellate courts may abate appeals so that trial court can assure 

appellant has effective assistance of counsel). It is further ORDERED the trial court clerk file a 

supplemental clerk’s record containing documentation of such appointment within 15 days from 

the date of this order. After the supplemental clerk’s record is filed, the appeal will be reinstated 

on the docket of this court. All appellate deadlines are suspended pending the reinstatement of 

the appeal.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 28th day of April, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of

- )

)

EDR Construction LLC ) ASBCA No. 63552

)

Under Contract No. W912P8

- 21

- P

- 0045 )

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT : W. Lee Kohler, Esq.

Kohler Construction Law, APLC

Metairie, LA

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq.

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Dalton B. Hammond, Esq.

Engineer Trial Attorney

U.S. Army Engineer District, New Orleans

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: October 2 5 , 2023

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 63552

, Appeal of EDR Construction

LLC , rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: Octo ber 25, 2023 JOHN J. THRASHER

Administrative Judge

Chairman

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES

- LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
<PAGE>

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549


                                    FORM 8-K


                                 CURRENT REPORT


                       PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
                       THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


Date of Report (date of earliest event reported):  September 1, 2000

                              OXBORO MEDICAL, INC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)


           MINNESOTA                    0-18785                 41-1391803
(State or other jurisdiction          (Commission           (I.R.S. Employer
      of incorporation)               File Number)         Identification No.)


13828 Lincoln Street NE
Ham Lake, Minnesota                                      55304
------------------------                             ----------
(Address of principal executive offices)              (Zip Code)


Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (763) 755-9516


<PAGE>

Item 2.  ACQUISITION OR DISPOSITION OF ASSETS


         Through a series of purchases, Oxboro Medical, Inc. (the "Company") has
acquired 200,000 shares of common stock of Minntech Corporation (NasdaqNM: MNTX)
as of September 14, 2000. Minntech Corporation develops, manufactures and
markets medical devices, sterilants, and water purification products. The
Company paid approximately $1.35 million in total consideration for the 200,000
shares, all of which was financed from the working capital of the Company. As of
July 1, 2000 Minntech Corporation had approximately 6,678,016 outstanding shares
of common stock, as reported in Minntech Corporation's Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended July 1, 2000 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
management of the Company continues to consider all strategies to maximize value
for the Company's shareholders, including, but not limited to, additional
purchases of Minntech Corporation stock should market conditions warrant such
purchases. The Company has no relationship to Minntech Corporation other than
that of shareholder. All shares were purchased in open market transactions.


                                        2


<PAGE>

                                    SIGNATURE

         Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


                                    OXBORO MEDICAL, INC.



                                    By      /s/ Linda Erickson
                                       --------------------------------------
                                    Linda Erickson, Chief Financial Officer


Dated: September 15, 2000.

                                        3
ex10a.htm
















Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 27 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-141766) and Amendment No. 300 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08441), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 31, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York and (b) April 12, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity Variable Annuity Account H for the interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP














Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


November 16, 2016
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 on Form 10-Q of Firsthand Technology Value Fund, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Kevin Landis, as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his 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.
  Date: November 9, 2012
 
 /s/ Kevin Landis
 Kevin Landis
 Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A2284. JAMES ALLEN COBB v. THE STATE.

In 2010, James Cobb pled guilty to burglary and theft by taking, and he was

sentenced as a recidivist to fifteen years, to serve ten. In 2014, Cobb filed a motion

to correct his sentence. The trial court denied the motion, and Cobb filed this direct

appeal. We lack jurisdiction.

 Under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f), a court may modify a sentence during the year

after its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal,

whichever is later. Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 347-348 (691 SE2d 247)

(2010); Burg v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 118 (676 SE2d 465) (2009). Once this

statutory period expires, as it had when Cobb filed his motion, a trial court may

modify a sentence only if it is void. Jones v. State, 278 Ga. 669, 670 (604 SE2d 483)

(2004).

A direct appeal may lie from the denial of a motion to correct a void sentence

only if the defendant raises a colorable claim that the sentence is void. See Burg v.

State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 119 (676 SE2d 465) (2009). A sentence is void only when

the trial court imposes a punishment that the law does not allow; assertions taking

issue with the procedure employed in imposing the sentence do not constitute

colorable void sentence claims. See Coleman v. State, 305 Ga. App. 680 (700 SE2d

668) (2010). Here, Cobb does not allege any colorable void sentence claim. He

claims the trial court erred in sentencing him because he was not provided proper

notice of the state’s intent to prosecute him as a recidivist, as required by OCGA §

17-10-2 (a). “OCGA § 17-10-2 (a) is not applicable to sentences imposed pursuant

to a hearing on a guilty plea.” Burruss v. State, 242 Ga. App. 241, 243 (2) (529 SE2d

August 10, 2015
375) (2000). Thus, Cobb has not raised a valid void sentence claim, as his sentence

does not impose punishment that the law does not allow. Accordingly, this appeal is

hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

08/10/2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM Q2 FY01 FORM
10-Q FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-2000
<CASH>                                          73,735
<SECURITIES>                                    41,753
<RECEIVABLES>                                   88,649
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,374
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               237,913
<PP&E>                                         111,447
<DEPRECIATION>                                  51,006
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 917,319
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          132,375
<BONDS>                                        140,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            74
<OTHER-SE>                                     634,899
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   917,319
<SALES>                                        131,064
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               192,899
<CGS>                                           17,124
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   46,280
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               204,782
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (4,279)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (43,279)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (49,779)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (49,779)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.71)


</TABLE>