alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Affirmed and Opinion Filed January 12, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-13-01141-CR
JEREMY JOHN SANDERSFELD, Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 416-82341-07



### MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Myers and Brown Opinion by Chief Justice Wright
Jeremy John Sandersfeld appeals following th e adjudication of his guilt for aggravated
sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years. See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. § 22.021(a)(1)(B) (West Supp. 2014). The trial court assessed punishment at twenty-eight years’
imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney f iled a brief in which she concludes the appeal is
wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California
, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a profes sional evaluation of the record showing why, in
effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12
(Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. See‐ 2 ‐ Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying dutie s of appellate

courts and counsel in Anders cases).
Appellant filed a pro se response raising seve ral issues After reviewing counsel’s brief,
appellant’s pro se response, and th e record, we agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit.

See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. A pp. 2005) (explaining appellate
court’s duty in Anders cases). We find nothing in the r ecord that might arguably support the
appeal.
We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Do Not Publish T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47 131141F.U05
/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE‐ 3 ‐ 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT

JEREMY JOHN SANDERSFELD, Appellant

No. 05-13-01141-CR V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 416-82341-07. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, Justices Myers and Br own participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt is AFFIRMED

.

Judgment entered January 12, 2015.
<PAGE> 

Exhibit 23.1

                    Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form
10-K) of Belden Inc. of our report dated January 19, 1998, included in the
1997 Annual Report to Shareholders of Belden Inc.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Form S-8) pertaining to the Belden Inc. Employee Stock Purchase
Plan (No. 33-66830), the Belden Inc. Employee Long-Term Incentive Plan (No.
33-83154), and the Belden Inc. Non-Employee Director Stock Plan (No. 333-
11071) of our report dated January 19, 1998, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Belden Inc. incorporated herein by
reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
1997.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
St. Louis, Missouri
March 24, 1998<PAGE>
Letter Agreement Contract with Malcolm Thompson



 Exhibit 10.4 
  
 [Photon Dynamics, Inc. Letterhead] 
  

April 8, 2005 
  
 Dr. Malcolm Thompson 
 c/o Photon Dynamics, Inc. 
 5970 Optical Court 
 San Jose, CA 95138 
  
 Dear Malcolm: 
  
 As you are aware, Photon Dynamics, Inc. (the “Company”) and you are party to a consulting agreement dated March 18, 2004, as amended on December 22, 2004 (as
amended, the “Agreement”), pursuant to which you provide Consulting Services (as defined in the Agreement) to the Company in the position of Executive Chairman of the Company’s board of directors. The Company is pleased to offer to
extend the Consulting Period (as defined in Section 1 of the Agreement) from March 31, 2005 to September 30, 2005; provided, however, that during this extended period (1) you shall only be required to make yourself available to perform consulting
services for up to four (4) days per month through June 30, 2005, and two (2) days thereafter through September 30, 2005, as arranged and agreed between you and the Company’s President and CEO, (2) the Consulting Payments for the months of
April through June 2005 shall be $8,000 per month, and (3) the Consulting Payments for the months of July through September 2005 shall be $4,000 per month. 
  
 Subject to approval of the Board, the Company shall grant you an additional nonstatutory stock option to purchase 7,500 shares of the Company’s Common Stock (the
“Second Option”) pursuant to the Company’s Amended and Restated 1995 Stock Option Plan (the “1995 Plan”). The exercise price of the Second Option shall be equal to the fair market value of the Company’s common stock as
of the date of grant, as determined by the Board. On April 7, 2005, 8.33% of the Second Option shares shall vest and be exercisable. On May 7, 2005, and on the seventh day of each month thereafter so long as you continue to remain a director of the
Company, 8.33% of the Second Option shares will vest and become exercisable, so that the Second Option will be fully vested and exercisable on March 7, 2006 if you continue to remain a director through that date. The Second Option shall have such
other terms as reflect annual grants made to Non-Employee Directors under the 1995 Plan, and shall otherwise be governed by the terms and conditions of the 1995 Plan and the applicable stock option agreement and grant notice. 
  
 If you are in agreement with the above, please sign and return to me the original of this
Agreement and retain a copy for your files. Other than as set forth above, all provisions of the Agreement remain unchanged by this letter. 
  
 We look forward to continuing to work with you pursuant to the Agreement, as so amended. 
  
 Sincerely, 
  

			
	Photon Dynamics, Inc.	 	 
		
	 /s/ Jeffrey Hawthorne
	 	 4/8/05

	 Jeffrey Hawthorne
 Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
		
	Accepted and Agreed:	 	 
		
	 /s/ Malcolm Thompson
	 	  
	 Malcolm Thompson
Exhibit 23.2





Consent of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm



The Board of Directors
Astoria Financial Corporation:



We consent to the incorporation by reference
in the Registration Statements of Astoria Financial Corporation on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-113745, 333-113785, 333-147580, 333-170874,
333-197481, and 333-210733) and Form S-3 (No. 333-204555) of our reports dated February 28, 2017, with respect to the consolidated
statements of financial condition of Astoria Financial Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and
the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2016, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2016, which reports appear in the December 31, 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Astoria
Financial Corporation.



(signed) KPMG LLP



New York, New York
April 13, 2017
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,170
<SECURITIES>                                     1,240
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,589
<ALLOWANCES>                                       136
<INVENTORY>                                      1,667
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,653
<PP&E>                                           7,870
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,681
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,582
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,621
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,192
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,582
<SALES>                                          7,773
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,523
<CGS>                                            7,387
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,387
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 266
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,300
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,300
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .37
        

</TABLE>
# Clay - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Creating PPE for Nurses and School Officials in Western North Carolina STEMwork in western North Carolina (WNCSTEMwork) is a teacher professional development initiative of the Kenan Institute for Engineering, Technology, and Science at North Carolina State University. With ARC support, this program supports six middle and high school teachers from ten counties as they develop their capacity to lead and sustain STEM workforce education. In April [&#8230;]The post Creating PPE for Nurses and School Officials in Western North Carolina appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Southwestern Commission Executive Director Sarah Thompson Email &#115;&#x61;r&#97;&#x68;&#64;&#114;&#x65;g&#105;&#x6f;n&#97;&#x2e;&#111;&#x72;&#x67;The post Southwestern Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 128 (Thursday, September 20, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S6558]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                 ORDERS FOR FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2012

  Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the 
Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 12 p.m. on 
Friday, September 21, 2012; that following the prayer and pledge, the 
Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed 
expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use 
later in the day; that the majority leader be recognized and that the 
first hour be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or 
their designees with the majority controlling the first half and 
Republicans controlling the final half.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________
```
#### DUTTON v. CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY et al.

No. 35805.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

March 17, 1953.

Harlan Deupree and W. A. Blackburn, Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.

A. L. Jeffrey, Municipal Counselor, Edward H. Moler, Asst. Municipal Counselor and Robinson, Shipp, Robertson & Barnes, Oklahoma City, for defendants in error.

JOHNSON, Vice Chief Justice.

W. A. Dutton commenced an action for injunction against the City of Oklahoma City and another to prohibit the City of Oklahoma City from leasing certain property to Leo Portman.

The plaintiff alleged that he represents himself and those similarly situated; that defendant, City of Oklahoma City, was about to enter into an illegal lease contract and sought to enjoin the execution of the lease.

A temporary injunction was issued and thereafter a hearing' was held at the conclusion of which the court entered a judgment for the defendants. Plaintiff ' has appealed.

A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason the judgment of the trial court was not superseded and the court having held that in the absence of an order superseding the judgment the defendant, City of Oklahoma City, had a right to lease the property; that said lease has been executed and the question on appeal has been rendered moot. The appeal must be dismissed. In Harden v. Morris, 198 Okl. 398, 179 P.2d 144, we said:

> “When the question presented by an appeal has become moot, the appeal will be dismissed.”

> Appeal dismissed.

HALLEY, C. J., and WELCH, CORN, DAVISON, O’NEAL, WILLIAMS and .BLACKBIRD, JJ.
# AMERICANAIRLINES

April 9, 2010

Dorothy Beard Docket Branch Department of Transportation 1200 New JerseyAve., S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: 2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding, DOT-OST-2010-0018

DearMs. Beard:

AmericanAirlines, Inc. hereby submits letters in support of its application for U.S.-Tokyo (Haneda) authority from Federal and State elected officials, mayors, airports, chambers of commerce, and union leaders. American is seeking 14 weekly frequencies to operate dailynonstop service to Haneda fromNew York (JFK) and Los Angeles.

Respectfully submitted,

# Wl)M~ Carl B. Nelson, Jr. Associate General Counsel AmericanAirlines, Inc. 1101 17th Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 496-5647 carl.nelson@aa.com

cc: Service listCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document byemail on the following persons:

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com scott.mcclain@delta.com sametta.c.barnett@delta.com kquinn@pillsburywinthrop.com bkeiner@crowell.com mrosia@crowell.com bruce.rabinovitz@wilmerhale.com jeffrey.manley@united.com bob.kneisley@wnco.com robert.land@jetblue.com msinick@ssd.com cdonley@ssd.com gbleopard@fedex.com dvaughan@kelleydrye.com kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com jrichardson@johnlrichardson.com lhalloway@crowell.com efaberman@wileyrein.com mroller@rollerbauer.com howard.kass@usairways.com benjamin.slocum@usairways.com sophy.chen@hklaw.com david.heffernan@wilmerhale.com

April 9T 2010 jhill@dlalaw.com bill@mietuslaw.com mgoldman@sgbdc.com rsilverberg@sgbdc.com dhainbach@ggh-airlaw.com mcmillin@woa.com eskraft@jamhoff.com dpdean@jamhoff.com dkirstein@yklaw.com jyoung@yklaw.com donna.kooperstein@usdoj.gov dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil jim.ballough@faa.gov byerlyjr@state.gov recohn@hhlaw.com simpson@zsrlaw.com pmurphy@lopmurphy.com lachter@starpower.net anita.mosner@hklaw.com rpommer@atlasair.com gmurphy@crowell.com russell.bailey@alpa.org
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICERPURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Unify Corporation (the “Registrant”) onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Todd E. Wille, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Registrant, do hereby certify in accordance with 18U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that, based on my knowledge:

 

(1)the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

 

(2)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 
| Dated: September 10, 2004 | /s/ TODD E. WILLE       |
|---------------------------|-------------------------|
|                      | Todd E. Wille           |
|                      | Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

*A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwiseadopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic versionof this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to UnifyCorporation and will be retained by Unify Corporation and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.*

 

----
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**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 amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of Blast
        Energy Services, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30,
        2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
        (the “Report”), I, David M. Adams, Co-Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating
        Officer and Principal Executive 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:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:
      March 29, 2006




By:
            /s/    DAVIDM.
                ADAMS**David
                M. Adams****Co-
                Chief Executive Officer****Chief
                Operating Officer****Principal
                Executive
                Officer**
Electronically Filed 

Supreme Court 

SCPW-14-0000567 

24-APR-2014 

11:18 AM 

SCPW-14-0000567
 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
 

STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent,
 

vs.
 

ROY ALAN COSTA, Petitioner.
 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
 

(CR. NO. 00-1-0253)
 

ORDER DENYING “DEFENDANT MOTION FOR DISMISSAL
 

OF ALL CHARGES TOWARD COURTS UNTIMELY RESPONSE”
 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ., and


Circuit Judge Nakasone, assigned by reason of vacancy)
 

Upon consideration of petitioner Roy Costa’s document 

entitled “Defendant Motion for Dismissal of All Charges Toward 

Courts Untimely Response,” which was filed as a petition for a 

writ of mandamus on April 15, 2014, and the record, it appears 

that petitioner fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and 

indisputable right to the requested relief and that he lacks 

alternative means to seek relief. An extraordinary writ, 

therefore, is not warranted. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 

204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an 

extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner 
demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack
 

of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or
 

obtain the requested action); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao,
 

59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of mandamus is
 

not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of
 

the trial courts, cure a mere legal error, or serve as a legal
 

remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedure). Accordingly, 


IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
 

court shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without
 

payment of the filing fee.
 

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the petition is
 

denied. 


IT IS HEREBY FINALLY ORDERED that the appellate clerks’
 

office shall not accept any further filings from petitioner in
 

this closed proceeding. 


DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, April 24, 2014. 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
 

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack
 

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4810 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4810

 To direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and 
  Information to carry out activities relating to the development and 
     maintenance of a broadband inventory map through the National 
 Telecommunications and Information Administration and not through an 
                    agreement with any other agency.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 17, 2018

   Mr. Johnson of Ohio (for himself and Mr. Guthrie) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and 
  Information to carry out activities relating to the development and 
     maintenance of a broadband inventory map through the National 
 Telecommunications and Information Administration and not through an 
                    agreement with any other agency.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Making Available Plans to Promote 
Investment in Next Generation Networks without Overbuilding and Waste 
Act of 2018'' or the ``MAPPING NOW Act of 2018''.

SEC. 2. BROADBAND INVENTORY MAP.

    (a) To Be Carried Out by NTIA.--The Assistant Secretary of Commerce 
for Communications and Information shall carry out subsection (l) of 
section 6001 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (47 
U.S.C. 1305) through the National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration and not through a memorandum of understanding or other 
agreement with any other agency. Nothing in this subsection shall be 
construed to prohibit the Assistant Secretary from consulting with 
another agency in carrying out such subsection (l).
    (b) No Additional Funds Authorized.--No additional funds are 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act. This Act shall be 
carried out using amounts otherwise authorized.
                                 <all>
```
#### EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Appellant, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION.

No. 87-5174.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Oct. 30, 1990.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, Chief Judge, BECKER and GARTH, Circuit Judges.

*124ORDER

The panel opinion filed July 5, 1990, 907 F.2d 1365, is hereby vacated nunc pro tunc as of September 20, 1990.*

*

 The practice in this court is to vacate the panel opinion when a petition for panel rehearing is granted. Such an order was inadvertantly not entered when panel rehearing was granted on September 20, 1990 in this case.
EXHIBIT 32.01***CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER***     I, Bruce Cleland, the Chief Executive Officer of Campbell & Company, Inc. as generalpartner of Campbell Strategic Allocation Fund, L.P., certify that (i) the Form 10K for the yearended December 31, 2006 of Campbell Strategic Allocation Fund, L.P. fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) theinformation contained in the Form 10K for the year ended December 31, 2006 fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Campbell StrategicAllocation Fund, L.P.      CAMPBELL STRATEGIC ALLOCATION FUND, L.P.   By:       Campbell & Company, Inc., general partner      By:       /s/ Bruce L. Cleland    Bruce L. Cleland    Chief Executive Officer