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

For the First Circuit

No. 02-2688

IRENE CRUZ-VARGAS, ELI ROGELIO FIGUEROA-CRUZ

AND LUIS ROGELIO FIGUEROA-CRUZ,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY,

Defendant, Appellee,

R.J.R. NABISCO, INC., NABISCO GROUP HOLDINGS,

Defendants.

ERRATA SHEET 

The opinion of this Court, issued on October 28, 2003,

should be amended as follows:

1. p9, lines 12-13: Delete "prevalence of the habit," insert in

its place "difficulty of abandoning the habit"

2. p11, line 7: After citation, insert new sentence, including

moving current footnote 7 as indicated:

This rule is particularly applicable to the

"testimony of an expert witness . . . where the

testimony bears on technical questions . . . beyond

the competence of lay determination." QuintanaRuiz, 303 F.3d at 76-77 (quoting Webster v.

Offshore Food Serv., Inc., 434 F.2d 1191, 1193 (5th

Cir. 1970)(internal citation omitted)(ellipses in

original). This is such a case. The "common

knowledge" defense is assessed objectively [move

current fn 7 here], and, despite the nomenclature,

it is a technical question involving methods,

financing, and sources of research beyond the
competence of lay determination, at least when

pertaining to history forty or fifty years removed

from the time of trial. 

3. p11, line 7: begin a new paragraph with the sentence

"Martinez' research..."
Exhibit 31.3

Section 302 Certification

  I, Bill J. Lam, certify that: 

1.  I have reviewed this annual report of Form 10-K for the year 2003 ofHorizon Offshore, Inc.; 

2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

(a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

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

(a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and 

(b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting. 

 

 

Date: March 15, 2004

 

/s/ Bill J. Lam                                           

Bill J. Lam

President and

Chief Executive Officer

Horizon Offshore, Inc.
Exhibit
      4.4

    


    


    


    


    


    


    February
      27, 2006

    


    Smithfield
      Fiduciary LLC

    c/o
      Highbridge Capital Management, LLC

    9
      West
      57th
      Street

    27th
      Floor

    New
      York,
      New York

    USA
      10019

    Attention:        Ari
      J. Storch / Adam J. Chill

    


    


    Dear
      Sirs:

    


    
      	
              Re:

            	
              Generex
                Biotechnology Corporation

              -
                Amendments to
                Warrants

            


    

    


    We
      make
      reference to (a) the common stock purchase warrant issued by Generex
      Biotechnology Corporation (the “Company”)
      to
      Smithfield Fiduciary LLC (“Smithfield”)
      on
      October 27, 2005 pursuant to which the Company granted to Smithfield the
      entitlement to purchase up to 609,756 shares of the Company’s common stock at
      $1.25 per share, (b) the common stock purchase warrant issued by the Company
      to
      Smithfield on October 27, 2005 pursuant to which the Company granted to
      Smithfield the entitlement to purchase up to 304,878 shares of the Company’s
      common stock at $1.25 per share, and (c) the common stock purchase warrant
      issued by the Company to Smithfield on January 20, 2006 pursuant to which the
      Company granted to Smithfield the entitlement to purchase up to 952,381 shares
      of the Company’s common stock at $1.05 per share (collectively, the
“Warrants”).

    


    The
      Initial Exercise Date (as that term is defined in each of the Warrants) of
      each
      of the Warrants is expressed therein as the 181st
      day
      after the date thereof. The Company hereby confirms that, in consideration
      of
      the exercise by Smithfield of not less than 100% of the Warrants and the
      delivery to the Company of Notices of Exercise in respect thereof on or before
      the close of business on February 27, 2006, the Company has agreed to abridge
      the Initial Exercise Dates and to honor the aforementioned Notices of
      Exercise.


    
      
         

      

      
         

        
          

        

      

      
         

      

    


    


    In
      addition, the Company will grant to Smithfield an additional common stock
      purchase warrant pursuant to which the Company will grant to Smithfield the
      entitlement to purchase up to 933,508 shares of the Company’s common stock at
      $3.00 per share exercisable for a period of five years from and after August
      27,
      2006.

    


    Yours
      truly,

    


    Generex
      Biotechnology Corporation

    


    


    /s/
      Mark A. Fletcher             

    Mark
      A.
      Fletcher

    Executive
      Vice-President, General Counsel

    maf:hs
#### Everett Kelley CUNNINGHAM, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 26448.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 20, 1953.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

. Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted for the offense of murder with malice, and his punishment was assessed by the jury at confinement in the penitentiary for life.

Appellant has filed his personal affidavit stating that he no longer desires to prosecute this appeal and requests that the same be dismissed.

This request is accordingly granted and the appeal is, dismissed.

Opinion approved by the court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          12,941
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          11,178
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                 1,127
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    118,025
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           9,466
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             9,105
<LOANS>                                        234,417
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,689
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 401,105
<DEPOSITS>                                     234,972
<SHORT-TERM>                                   119,365
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,390
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               70
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      41,310
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 401,105
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 17,671
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               12,256
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                29,927
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              10,350
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,724
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           10,203
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      120
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 448
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  8,101
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,452
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       3,452
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,452
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .67
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.46
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,016
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  2,016
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,576
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       10
<RECOVERIES>                                         3
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,569
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,569
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF
CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE For purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, Roger K. Brooks, the Chairman
of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of AmerUs Group Co. (the Company),
hereby certifies that:  (i)
    
    the Annual report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended
December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Commission Act of
1934; and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company. /s/ Roger K. BrooksRoger K. BrooksChairman and Chief Executive OfficerAmerUs Group Co.
 Dated: March 12, 2004
exv10w2



 




EXHIBIT
10.2




AMENDMENT NO. 1

Dated as of December 1, 2005




TO THE




JEFFERIES GROUP, INC.




DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

As Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2003




     Pursuant to Section 8.5 of the Jefferies Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (the
“DCP”), the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors has authorized and directed that the
DCP be amended to provide that, solely with respect to amounts deferred in 2001 that would be
distributed as a lump sum in January 2006 and, in the case of executive officers, amounts deferred
in 2001 that would be distributed in installments (together, “2001 Deferrals”), the terms of the
DCP applicable to such 2001 Deferrals shall conform to 409A requirements (i.e., requirements that
would permit non-grandfathered deferrals to avoid 409A tax penalties).



     These amendments to the DCP as approved shall be effective December 1, 2005, and the DCP
Administrator is hereby authorized to provide to participants with 2001 Deferrals an opportunity
during 2005 to elect new distribution dates for such 2001 Deferrals (which may include
distributions during 2005) in accordance with 409A transition rules, and all actions of the DCP
Administrator in furtherance of this are ratified and approved.



     Appropriate officers of the Company are authorized to operate the DCP in conformity with the
DCP as amended hereby and, regarding deferrals other than the 2001 Deferrals, in conformity with
applicable 409A grandfathering rules for pre-2005 deferrals and with applicable 409A requirements
for deferrals in 2005 and later years, and to prepare such amendments to the DCP as they may deem
necessary or appropriate to conform the DCP to the provisions of 409A, and such officers are
directed to submit the amended Plan to the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors for
ratification before the end of 2006 (the scheduled end of the transition period under the 409A
transition rules).



     The appropriate officers of the Company are further authorized to take such other steps as any
of them may deem necessary or appropriate to implement these amendments to the DCP.
#### Thomas F. NEWMAN, Movant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 12, 1952.

Sandy Paniello, Louisville, for movant.

J. D. Buckman, Jr., Atty. Gen., for opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court, Criminal Branch, First Division. Judgment of conviction for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating beverage. $100 fine. The facts, questions raised, authorities cited and applicable law have been carefully considered by the Court.

Appeal denied.

Judgment affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARIA ELENA JIMENEZ

- JIMENEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 70919

Agency No. A019

- 117

- 766

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

S ubmitted August 19, 2019 **

Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Maria Elena Jim e nez

- Jim e nez , a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to

reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v.

Gonzal es , 4 00 F.3d 785

, 791 (9th Cir. 200 5 )

. We deny the petition for review.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

AUG 26 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 70919

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Jim e nez

- Jim e nez ’s motion

to reopen as untimely, where s he filed the motion more than twenty

- four years

after her final order of deport ation, and she did not present sufficient evidence of

due diligence for equitable tolling of the filing deadline. See 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003.2( c ) (2); Avagyan v. Holder , 646 F.3d 672, 679 (9th Cir. 2011) (equitable

tolling is available to a petitioner who is prevented from timely filing a motion to

reopen due to deception, fraud

, or error, as long as the petitioner exercises due

diligence in discovering such circumstances).

Because the due diligence determination is dispositive, the BIA was not

required to address prior counsels’ competence, and we do not address Jim e nez

Jim e nez’s contentions regarding prejudice. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft , 371 F.3d

532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to decide issues

unnecessary to the results they reach)

.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-60165

Summary Calendar 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee 

v. 

JAMES FRANKLIN PUTNAM, also known as Tony Martinez, also known as 

Bobby Spiers, also known as Bob Watson, 

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Mississippi 

USDC No. 1:97-CR-3-1 

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

James Franklin Putnam appeals the district court’s denial of his petition 

for a writ of error coram nobis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Putnam has 

completed his term of imprisonment but is still serving the five-year term of 

supervised release imposed following his guilty plea conviction of hostage 

taking in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1203.

 

* 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

Fif h Circuit

FILED

April 18, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-60165 Document: 00513957589 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/18/2017
No. 16-60165

2 

At all times, this court must be assured of its jurisdiction and the district 

court’s jurisdiction. United States v. Key, 205 F.3d 773, 774 (5th Cir. 2000). 

Because Putnam is still subject to an unexpired term of supervised release, he 

is “in custody” and ineligible for coram nobis relief. See United States v. 

Scruggs, 691 F.3d 660, 662 n.1 (5th Cir. 2012); United States v. Esogbue, 357 

F.3d 532, 534 (5th Cir. 2004). Because Putnam is challenging his federal 

conviction, the district court should have construed his petition as a 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 motion. See Tolliver v. Dobre, 211 F.3d 876, 877-78 (5th Cir. 2000). The 

district court, however, lacked jurisdiction to do so because Putnam previously 

filed a § 2255 motion, and this court did not authorize the filing of a successive 

§ 2255 motion. See Hooker v. Sivley, 187 F.3d 680, 681-82 (5th Cir. 1999); 28 

U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). The district court’s judgment is therefore AFFIRMED 

on the alternative ground that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider 

Putnam’s petition. See United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994). 

All pending motions are DENIED. 

 Case: 16-60165 Document: 00513957589 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/18/2017
EXHIBIT 32.1

STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18

U.S.C. SECTION
1350

The undersigned, Dwayne Powell, is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Pocahontas Bancorp, Inc. (the
Company).

This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company of the Companys Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2005, as amended (the Report).

By execution of this statement, I certify
that:



| | A) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | B) | 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 covered by the Report.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this statement
will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this statement be deemed
to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



|             |  |                  
|------------ |  | -----------------
|May 19, 2006 |  | /s/ Dwayne Powell
|Dated        |  | Dwayne Powell
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 24, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 63579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27271]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP01-50-000]


Portland Natural Gas Transmission System; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

October 18, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 13, 2000, Portland Natural Gas 
Transmission System (PNGTS) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheet 
to become effective November 1, 2000:

Original Sheet No. 337A

    PNGTS states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with the 
requirements of Order No. 587-L regarding the implementation of netting 
and trading of imbalances.
    PNGTS states that copies of ah defiling were mile to all affected 
customers and intrestedstate commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest s aid filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will reconsidered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make Protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become party must 
file am lotion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission an dare available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 forassistance.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-27271 Filed 10-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M