alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of H. Peter YOUNG, Esq., Respondent. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frank Stearns GIESE, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raymond EAGLIN, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 74-3407 and 75-2720.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

March 9, 1976.

ORDER OF DISBARMENT

Before CARTER, WRIGHT and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges.

Attorney H. Peter Young of Venice, California, has been before this court on January 8, 1976, and March 9, 1976, having been ordered to show cause why penalties should not be imposed for his failure to prosecute the appeals in two criminal causes, in each of which he was acting as counsel or co-counsel. *See In Matter of Young, Esq.,*537 F.2d 323 (9th Cir. 1976). His derelictions *327have contributed to the ultimate dismissal of the appeals in both matters.1 His conduct throughout the history of the two cases demonstrates that he lacks the professional qualifications and integrity which are requisite in attorneys who practice in the federal courts.

IT IS ORDERED that H. Peter Young be disbarred from further practice before this court and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys.

1

. Orders of Dismissal, *United States v. Giese,*Docket No. 74-3407 (9th Cir. Mar. 9, 1976); *United States v. Eaglin,*Docket No. 75-2720 (9th Cir. March 9, 1976).
# C_2008285EN.01004201.xml

| 8.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 285/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/42

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 September 2008 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case T-143/08) (1)

1

(Civil service - Social security - Refusal of the application for reimbursement of 100 % of certain medical expenses incurred by the applicant)

(2008/C 285/77)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall, C. Berardis-Kayser, Agents and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Inter alia, an application for annulment of the decisions of the office responsible for settling claims of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the European Communities refusing to pay 100 % of certain medical expenses incurred by the applicant or to reimburse the expenses for a medical visit in accordance with the rules applicable to consultations of medical experts, and an application that the Commission be ordered to pay certain medical expenses for the applicant.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | The parties are ordered to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The parties are ordered to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 223 of 22.9.2007 (formerly Case F-20/07).

1

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 123 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H6000]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut:
       H.R. 6403.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article 1, Section 8.
```
|   | (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:              February 21, 2006 |   | /s/ Charles              Roodenburg                              |
|                                      |   | Charles              Roodenburg, Chief Financial              Officer |
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

EXHIBIT 21

The subsidiaries of Allied Holdings, Inc. and the place of incorporation or
organization are as follows:

<TABLE>
<S>                                             <C>
Allied Automotive Group, Inc.                   Georgia
Axis Group, Inc.                                Georgia
Allied Systems, Ltd., LP                        Georgia
Allied Systems (Canada) Company                 Nova Scotia
GACS Incorporated                               Georgia
Allied Freight Broker, LLC                      Delaware
QAT, Inc.                                       Florida
Terminal Services, LLC                          Delaware
F.J. Boutell Driveaway, LLC                     Delaware
RMX, LLC                                        Delaware
Transport Support, LLC                          Delaware
Commercial Carriers, Inc.                       Michigan
Haul Insurance Limited                          Cayman Islands
AH Industries, Inc.                             Alberta
Kar-Tainer International Limited                Bermuda
Axis Netherlands, LLC                           Georgia
Axis Areta, LLC                                 Georgia
Arrendadora de Equipo para el                   Mexico
Transporte de Automoviles, s. de R.L. de C.V.
Axis Logistica, S. de R.L. de C.V.              Mexico
Logistic Technology, LLC - Georgia              Georgia
Logistic Systems, LLC                           Georgia
Axis Canada Company                             Nova Scotia
CT Services, Inc.                               Michigan
Cordin Transport, LLC                           Delaware
Axis Operadora Hermosillo                       Mexico
ACE Operations, LLC                             Georgia
</TABLE>
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4641 

AN ACT 

To authorize the President to award the Medal of Honor 

to John L. Canley for acts of valor during the Vietnam 

War while a member of the Marine Corps. 

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

•HR 4641 EH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION FOR AWARD OF MEDAL OF 

2 HONOR TO JOHN L. CANLEY FOR ACTS OF 

3 VALOR DURING THE VIETNAM WAR. 

4 (a) WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS.—Notwith5 standing the time limitations specified in section 6248 of 

6 title 10, United States Code, or any other time limitation 

7 with respect to the awarding of certain medals to persons 

8 who served in the Armed Forces, the President may award 

9 the Medal of Honor under section 6241 of such title to 

10 John L. Canley for the acts of valor during the Vietnam 

11 War described in subsection (b). 

12 (b) ACTS OF VALOR DESCRIBED.—The acts of valor 

13 referred to in subsection (a) are the actions of then Gun14 nery Sergeant John L. Canley during combat operations 

15 from January 31, 1968, to February 6, 1968, during the 

16 Vietnam War as a member of the Marine Corps, for which 

17 he was previously awarded the Navy Cross. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 21, 

2017. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4641 

AN ACT 

To authorize the President to award the Medal of 

Corps. the Vietnam War while a member of the Marine Honor to John L. Canley for acts of valor during
#### Petition of Jacfl WININEGER for Writ of Error Coram Nobis.

No. A-12787.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Oct. 14, 1959.

James O. Braly, Durant, for petitioner.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Lewis A. Wallace, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

BRETT, Judge.

In this petition for writ of error coram nobis the petitioner asserts that one of the participants in the killing of Morgan Haddock would testify, as would other witnesses not named, that Jack Winineger or James Winineger did not participate in the crime, and that the petitioner would positively deny any participation therein, and other witnesses would support him thereon.

This attempt to void the judgment and sentence herein brings this petition *1118squarely within the rules as stated by Freeman on Judgments, Sth Ed., § 2S6, p. 514:

> “This writ does not lie to correct any error in the judgment of the court, nor to contradict or put in issue any fact directly passed upon and affirmed by the judgment itself. If this could be, there would be no end to litigation. 3⁄8 * * The writ of error coram nobis is not intended to authorize any court to review and revise its opinions; but only to enable it to recall some adjudication made while some fact existed which, if before the court, would have prevented the rendition of the judgment, and which without any fault or negligence of the party, was not presented to the court.”

In Humphreys v. State, 129 Wash. 309, 224 P. 937, 33 A.L.R. 78, an attempt was made by affidavit under coram nobis proceeding to absolve the accused, Humphreys, from guilt in the theft of ten sacks of wheat by affiant’s assuming responsibility therefor, stating that Humphreys was not with them and knew nothing about the crime. In syllabus 1, it was said:

> “A judgment cannot be set aside on a petition for a writ of coram nobis on a showing which in fact constitutes but newly discovered evidence on the actual merits of the controversy tried and decided by the judgment, however conclusively such evidence may seem to establish that the judgment was wrong.”

The petitioner herein seeks likewise to contradict and put in issue the very fact passed upon and affirmed by the judgment of conviction. As to whether this evidence now sought to be relied on would change the result is most speculative. As we said before in In re Winineger, Okl.Cr., 337 P. 2d 445, we will never permit the law to become a game of chance where the defendant can gamble with the court. This petitioner, on reasoned judgment, made an election to pursue a course of defense. On that, 337 P.2d at page 449, we said:

> In such case as the one at bar, the defendant may not at a later time reopen the case and have another jury speculate on his truthfulness, which he was unwilling to have weighed in the first instance. In any proceeding, litigants should not be permitted to play fast and loose with either the law or the courts. This petitioner seeks so to do.”

This petition does not bring the petitioner within the relief afforded by writ of error coram nobis. The petition is accordingly denied.

POWELL, P. J., and NIX, L, concur.
# C_2008092EN.01001301.xml

| 12.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā apgabaltiesa (Republic of Latvia) lodged on 15 January 2008 — SIA Schenker v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

(Case C-16/08)

(2008/C 92/22)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Administratīvā apgabaltiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SIA Schenker

Applicant:

Defendant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Defendant:

Question referred

Must heading 8528 21 90 of the Combined Nomenclature be interpreted as meaning that, as at 29 December 2004, it was also applicable to active matrix liquid crystal devices (TFT LCD — LTA320W2-L01, LTA260W1-L02, LTM170W1-L01) principally made up of the following elements:

| (1) | two glass plates; |
| --- | --- |

(1)

two glass plates;

| (2) | a layer of liquid crystal inserted between the two plates; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

a layer of liquid crystal inserted between the two plates;

| (3) | vertical and horizontal signal drivers; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

vertical and horizontal signal drivers;

| (4) | backlight; |
| --- | --- |

(4)

backlight;

| (5) | inverter providing high voltage power for backlight; |
| --- | --- |

(5)

inverter providing high voltage power for backlight;

| (6) | control block — data transmission interface (control PCB or PWB) to ensure sequential transmission of data to each pixel (dot) of the LCD unit using specific technology — LVDS (low voltage differential signalling)? |
| --- | --- |

(6)

control block — data transmission interface (control PCB or PWB) to ensure sequential transmission of data to each pixel (dot) of the LCD unit using specific technology — LVDS (low voltage differential signalling)?

---
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4748 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deny a deduction for 

severance payments made in connection with sexual misconduct. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 9, 2018 

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York (for herself, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mrs. 

DEMINGS, Ms. NORTON, Mr. SUOZZI, and Mr. KHANNA) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deny a 

deduction for severance payments made in connection 

with sexual misconduct. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR SEVERANCE PAY4 MENTS MADE IN CONNECTION WITH SEXUAL 

5 MISCONDUCT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 162 of the Internal Rev7 enue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsection 

8 (q) as subsection (r) and by inserting after subsection (p) 

9 the following new subsection: 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4748 IH

1 ‘‘(q) DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR SEVERANCE PAY2 MENTS MADE IN CONNECTION WITH SEXUAL MIS3 CONDUCT.—No deduction shall be allowed under this 

4 chapter for any amount paid or incurred to any employee 

5 in connection with the termination of employment of such 

6 employee if a factor in such termination was sexual as7 sault, sexual harassment, or any other sexual misconduct 

8 by such employee.’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

10 this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred in tax11 able years ending after the date of the enactment of this 

12 Act. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 10.29**

GREEN MOUNTAIN COFFEE ROASTERS, INC. 

2006 INCENTIVE PLAN 

Amendment 

Pursuant to Section 9of the Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. 2006 Incentive Plan, as amended, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. hereby further amends said Plan, effective as of December 9, 2008, by revising Section 4(d) in its entirety to read asfollows: 

“**(d) Additional Limitations**. Subject to Section 7(b), (i) a maximum of 180,000shares of Stock may be delivered in satisfaction of Full Value Awards under the Plan, and (ii) a maximum equal to the lesser of 80,000 shares of Stock or ten (10%) percent of the shares authorized under Section 4(a) may be deliveredin satisfaction of Specified Awards. For purposes of the ten (10%) percent limitation under clause (ii) of the preceding sentence, (A) the last sentence of the definition of “Specified Award” shall be applied by substitutingthe word “retirement” for “separation from service,” and (B) any Stock Option that is accelerated, other than by reason of death, disability, retirement or a Covered Transaction, shall be treated as a Specified Award.”
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 IVI Communications, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned 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.



Date: August 14, 2004             /s/ Charles Roodenburg
                                   ----------------------
                                   Charles Roodenburg, Chief Financial Officer






                                       43
<PAGE>
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Advanced Cell Technology, Inc.(the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned, Ivan Wolkind, Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

| Dated: May 15, 2007 |   | /s/ IVAN WOLKIND         |
|--------------------------|--------|--------------------------|
|                     |   | Ivan Wolkind             |
|                     |   | Chief Accounting Officer |

 

----
Opinion issued March 2 8 , 201 9

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 18
- 01029
- CV

——————————— IN RE JILL KATHRYN A RNO PETERSON , Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson originally sought mandamus relief from the trial court’s November 9, 2018 order granting real party in interest Donald Jonathan Peterson’s amended motion to vacate the trial court’s August 27, 2018 family

- violence protective order. 1 In January 2019, the Court abated th is proceeding

1 The underlying case is Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson v. Donald Jonathan Peterson , cause number 2018

- 43305, pending in the 280th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Barbara Stalder presiding.2

and remanded to the trial court to permit the successor trial judge to reconsider the previous ruling. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 7.2(b). The successor trial judge signed an order on January 28, 2019, granting the amended motion to vacate, and thus, relator sought relief from this new order. After consideration of the petition, response, and the record, w e conclude that relator has not established that she is entitled to relief , and we deny the petition. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.8(a). We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Lloyd, Kelly, and Hightower

.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10.14  


 
 

IHS INC.
  2004 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN    
    
    2004 RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD    
    


        Unless defined in this Restricted Stock Award (this "Award Document"), capitalized terms will have the same
meanings ascribed to them in the IHS Inc. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan (as may be amended from time to time, the "Plan"). 


        Pursuant
to Section 8 of the Plan, you have been granted restricted Shares on the following terms and subject to the provisions of the Plan, which is incorporated by reference. In
the event of a conflict between the provisions of the Plan and this Award Document, the provisions of the Plan will prevail. 



	Participant:	 	Jerre Stead
	
Total Number of Shares Granted:	
 	

200,000 Shares
	
Fair Market Value per Share:	
 	

$9.12 per Share
	
Total Fair Market Value of Award:	
 	

$1,722,000
	
Grant Date:	
 	

December 23, 2004
	
Vesting Schedule:	
 	

1/3 will vest on November 30, 2005, another 1/3 will vest on November 30, 2006 and the last 1/3 will vest on November 30, 2007; provided, however, that in the event of a Change in Control, this Award shall vest in full and be free of restrictions, and you will participate in the acquisition to the extent of and in the same manner as all other
stockholders of the Company; and provided further that in the event of your death or termination of employment due to your Disability (as defined in Exhibit A attached), this Award shall vest in full and be free of restrictions.





        By
your signature and the signature of the Company's representative below, you and the Company agree that these Shares are granted under and governed by the terms and conditions of the
Plan and the terms and conditions set forth in the attached as Exhibit A. 



	RECIPIENT	 	IHS INC.
	
/s/  JERRE L. STEAD      
	
 	

By:	

/s/  S. AUXER      

	Jerre L. Stead

Print Name	 	Title: Senior Vice President IHC Inc.













QuickLinks


IHS INC. 2004 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN 2004 RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,485,483
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   63,287
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,587,571
<PP&E>                                         160,011
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,812,646
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          463,519
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       148,148
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,200,979
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,812,646
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               187,737
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,196,224
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,835
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,604,807)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,734,807)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 130,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,604,807)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.24)
        

</TABLE>