alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,

J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 28, 2011

h0620 

# Order

June 28, 2011

141914

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141914 COA: 255257 Wayne CC: 03-013651-01 TAVARIS MARKEITH BLANKS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the August 17, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
exv10wxny



 






Exhibit 10(n)




Directors’ Compensation Arrangements




     We increased our cash compensation for the non-employee directors effective July 1, 2004.
Since July 2004, directors have been paid an annual retainer fee of $35,000, plus $2,000 per board
meeting attended and $1,000 per telephone conference attended, including, as of the fourth quarter
of 2005, a $1,000 fee for meetings or conferences attended as part of their duties as a board or
committee member. The Chairman of the Compensation Committee and the Chairman of the Board are
also paid an additional fee of $5,000 per year. The Co-Chairman (or sole Chairman as of January 1,
2006) of the Audit Committee are both paid an additional fee of $20,000 per year and the other
Audit Committee members are paid an additional annual retainer of $5,000 for serving on the Audit
Committee. The members of the Audit Committee may also receive an additional $5,000 per year fee
for performing special services. The only such award to date has been to Mr. Heather who performs
review work on our annual reserve report and began receiving this additional fee in the fourth
quarter of 2002.



     The Director Plan allows each non-employee director to make a quarterly election to receive
his or her compensation either in cash or in shares of our common stock (see Exhibit 10(i)).



     Commencing in 2005, we began a practice to grant our directors stock option or stock
appreciation rights payable in common stock (“SARs”) each year, awarded at the discretion of the
Board of Directors. The awards cliff vest four years from the date of grant and have an exercise
price equal to the closing market price on the date of date. The directors received 3,000 SARs in
February 2006 as part of their annual grants for that year.



     During 2004 or 2005, we gave each non-employee director 20,000 shares of restricted stock that
vests over a period of five years, 20% per annum. As per the terms of the agreement, the Company
retains 60% of the shares as they vest, with such shares to be released when the director separates
from the Company. The remaining 40% are issued to the director on the vesting dates.
#### PARSONS v. WEST.

*No.*14287.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Fort Worth.

Feb. 13, 1942.

King, Dawson & Jones, of Wichita Falls, for appellant.

Stine, Bunting & Stine, of Henrietta, for appellee.

BROWN, Justice.

Heretofore, we granted an uncontested motion that was made by appellant to be permitted to file a belated statement of facts.

We granted the motion 'because we believed that, the transcript having been filed within ample time, and good cause, in our opinion, having been shown for not filing the statement of facts on time, we had the authority, under our discretion, to enter an order permitting the statement of facts to he filed.

The statement of facts was prepared and filed in the trial court in due season, but same was not táken from the District Clerk’s office within seventy-five (75) days from the date of rendition of judgment, and no motion was made within such seventy-five days requesting an extension of time within which to file the statement of facts.

The seventy-five days from and after judgment was rendered ended on June 17, 1941, and the motion for permission to file same was filed in this court on August 13, 1941.

Having ordered the filing of the statement of facts we naturally considered same in arriving at a judgment in the case.

We are now confronted with a motion for a rehearing, filed by the appellee, in which, for the first time, objection is made in this court to the filing of the statement of facts and in which there is a motion to strike the statement of facts because same was not timely filed and because no motion was made for an extension of time to file same at or before the expiration of the time provided for such motions in Rule 386, Rules of Civil Procedure.

From the opinion in Hidalgo County Water Control & Improvement Dist. No. 1 v. Van Horn et ux., 125 Tex. 486, 84 S.W.2d 699 (Supreme Court), we gather that the case before us is', in all of its essentials, “on all fours” with the cited authority.

See also the authorities cited in the opinion.

It appears to us that, when the motion to extend time for filing the transcript or the statement of facts is filed with us after the expiration of seventy-five (75) days from the date from which the appeal is taken, we are without authority to consider the motion and are, therefore, divested of all discretion in the matter.

The motion to strike the statement of facts is granted, the motion for a rehearing is granted and the judgment heretofore rendered by us on November 7, 1941, is set aside and the former opinion rendered on said date is withdrawn and the following opinion is this day rendered in this cause:

*225Opinion.

We have only the transcript before us, since the statement of facts has been stricken from the record on motion.

Findings of facts and conclusions of law were filed by the trial court, in which this cause was tried to the court.

The judgment is supported by the findings and we must presume that evidence was introduced to sustain the findings.

We find no fundamental error in the record, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

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


In connection  with the amended  Quarterly  Report of MDSI Mobile Data Solutions
Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"), I, Erik Dysthe, the President,  Chief Executive Officer,  Chairman of
the Board and Director of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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.


                                    /s/ Erik Dysthe
                                    ------------------------------------------
                                    Erik Dysthe
                                    President, Chief Executive Officer,
                                    Chairman of the Board and Director
                                    March 30, 2004
EXHIBIT 11.1

                                INTERCARDIA, INC.

             STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE
                  (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                      Three Months Ended                         Nine Months Ended
                                                           June 30,                                  June 30,
                                             -------------------------------------     --------------------------------------
                                                   1997                1996                  1997                1996
                                             -----------------   -----------------     -----------------   ------------------
<S>                                         <C>                  <C>                   <C>                 <C>   
Net Income (Loss) per Unaudited
   Consolidated Statements of
   Operations                                 $         (615)     $         (777)       $           403     $          2,068
                                             =================   =================     =================   ==================

Calculation of Weighted Average
   Number of Common Shares and
   Common Share Equivalents:
      Common Stock                                  6,758,411           6,726,621             6,746,842            5,273,114
      Series A Preferred Stock                              -                   -                     -              312,060 (1)
      Stock Options and Warrants                            -                   -               254,924              227,275 (2)
                                             -----------------   -----------------     -----------------   ------------------
                                                    6,758,411           6,726,621             7,001,766            5,812,449
                                             =================   =================     =================   ==================

Net Income (Loss) per Common Share            $        (0.09)     $        (0.12)       $          0.06     $           0.36
                                             =================   =================     =================   ==================
</TABLE>
--------------
(1)      All of the Series A Preferred shares were issued within one year of the
         initial filing date of Intercardia's initial public offering and are
         therefore treated as outstanding in accordance with Staff Accounting
         Bulletin Topic 4-D.

(2)      Includes stock options and warrants granted within one year of the
         initial filing date of Intercardia's initial public offering, which are
         treated as outstanding in accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin
         Topic 4-D. The amount is net of 60,882 shares that would be repurchased
         under the treasury stock method.

                                       15
<PAGE>
**Exhibit 8.1**

 

**JINPAN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED AND PRINCIPAL SUBSIDIARIES**

**AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2007**

 

| Name                                    | State of Incorporation           | Conducts Business Under |
|-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------|-------------------------|
|                                    |                             |                    |
| Jinpan International Limited            | British Virgin Islands           | Same                    |
| Jinpan International (USA) Limited      | New York                         | Same                    |
| Jinpan Electric (China) Company Limited | People’s Republic of China | Same                    |
| Hainan Jinpan Electric Company Limited  | People’s Republic of China | Same                    |
| Wuhan Jinpan Electric Company Limited   | People’s Republic of China | Same                    |
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

# DATES:

Written comments should be received on or before November 27, 2000 to be assured of consideration. 

## Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

*OMB Number:*                     1545-1449.                 

*Regulation Project Number:*                     IA-57-94 Final.                 

*Type of Review:*                     Extension.                 

*Title:*                     Cash Reporting by Court Clerks.                 

*Description:*                     Section 6050I(g) imposes a reporting requirement on criminal court clerks that receive more than $10,000 in cash as bail. The IRS will use the information to identify individuals with large cash incomes. Clerks must also furnish the information to the United States Attorney for the jurisdiction in which the individual charged with the crime resides and to each person posting the bond whose name appears on Form 8300.                 

*Respondents:*                     Federal Government, State, Local or Tribal Government.                

*Estimated Number of Respondents:*                     250.                 

*Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent:*                     30 minutes.                 

*Frequency of Response:*                     On occasion, Annually.                 

*Estimated Total Reporting Burden:*                     125 hours.                 

*Clearance Officer:*                     Garrick Shear, Internal Revenue Service, Room 5244, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224.                 

*OMB Reviewer:*                     Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7860, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.                 

Lois K. Holland, 

Departmental Reports Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 00-27475 Filed 10-25-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-U
#### WILEY v. STATE.

No. 26021.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 12, 1952.

No attorney on appeal.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

The conviction is for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor in a dry area. The punishment assessed is a fine of $335.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills o‘f exception. All matters of procedure appear to be in regular form.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
WINFIELD CAPITAL CORP.

                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                                                          Three Months Ended
                                                             December 31,
                                                      -------------------------
                                                         1996            1995
                                                      ---------       ---------
Primary and Fully Diluted Loss Per Share         
----------------------------------------
Weighted average number of                       
  shares outstanding .............................    5,023,361       4,083,361
                                                      ---------       ---------
Net income (loss) ................................      $80,568       ($160,982)
                                                        -------        --------
Net income (loss) per share ......................      $   .02       ($    .04)
                                                        =======        ========


                                                          Nine Months Ended
                                                             December 31,
                                                      -------------------------
                                                         1996            1995
                                                      ---------       ---------
Primary and Fully Diluted Loss Per Share         
----------------------------------------
Weighted average number of                       
    shares outstanding ...........................    5,023,361       3,023,010
                                                      ---------       ---------
Net loss .........................................     ($18,155)      ($210,930)
                                                        -------        --------
Net loss per share ...............................     ($  --  )      ($    .07)
                                                        =======        ========
                                               

                                      -13-
EXHIBIT 99.1
                       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 Quarterly Report of Winfield Capital Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we,
Paul A. Perlin, Chief Executive Officer and R. Scot Perlin, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Paul A. Perlin
-----------------------
Paul A. Perlin
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ R. Scot Perlin
-----------------------
R. Scot Perlin
Chief Financial Officer

February 13, 2003
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-20277 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus LY TRINH HINH, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CR-H-94-273-1

- - - - - - - - - - June 26, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ly Trinh Hinh appeals his sentence, contending that he should have received a reduction in his offense level for acceptance of responsibility and that his offense level should not have been increased for his role in the offense, for obstruction of justice, and for requiring more than minimal planning. Hinh executed a plea agreement containing a validNo. 95-20277 - 2 - waiver of the right to appeal his sentence, and Hinh’s sentence was determined in accordance with the plea agreement. Accordingly, Hinh’s appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See United States v. Portillo , 18 F.3d 290, 292-93 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 115 S. Ct. 244 (1994); see 5th Cir. R. 42.2. APPEAL DISMISSED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC d/b/a BRAZOS 

LICENSING AND DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., DELL INC., 

AND EMC CORPORATION,

Defendants.

Case No. 6:20-cv-00479-ADA

DECLARATION OF BRIAN A. ROSENTHAL IN SUPPORT OF

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

Case 6:20-cv-00479-ADA Document 31-1 Filed 10/05/20 Page 1 of 2
1

I, Brian A. Rosenthal, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney permitted to practice law before this Court pro hac vice and am 

licensed to practice law in New York and the District of Columbia. I am a partner with the law 

firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and counsel of record for Defendants Dell Technologies 

Inc., Dell Inc. and EMC Corporation in the above-captioned action. I have personal knowledge 

and/or am directly informed of the matters stated below and, if called, would testify to them under 

oath.

2. Attached here as Exhibit A is a true and correct excerpt from the file history of 

U.S. Patent No. 8,402,129. This was retrieved from the United States Patent Office’s website 

(https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair) on October 3, 2020.

3. Attached here as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Dell EMC 

OpenManage Essentials Version 2.5 User’s Guide.

4. Attached here as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the website titled 

Changes to the sales and support process for Dell EMC OpenManage Network Manager, 

available at https://www.dell.com/support/article/en-us/how16844/changes-to-the-sales-andsupport-processes-for-dell-emc-openmanage-network-manager?lang=en, which was last visited 

October 2, 2020.

5. Attached here as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the Dell EMC 

OpenManage NM v.8 User Guide.

6. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Dated: October 5, 2020

/s/ Brian A. Rosenthal___ 

Brian A. Rosenthal

Case 6:20-cv-00479-ADA Document 31-1 Filed 10/05/20 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 32.02****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 Viseon, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for thequarter and six months ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon February 10, 2006 (“Report”), the undersigned Officer of the Company hereby certifies pursuant 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:     1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and     2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: February 10, 2006
CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350
  In
connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Tongli
Pharmaceuticals (USA), Inc. for the period ended March 31, 2009, I, Mingli Yao,
Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:
  1. Such
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2009, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
March 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Tongli Pharmaceuticals (USA),
Inc.
 
 
 Dated:
July 15, 2009
  /s/
      Mingli YaoMingli
      YaoChief
      Executive Officer and Chairman
Order entered July 31, 2018

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 17

- 01288

- CR

EMMY BACKUSY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F16

- 54232

- N



### O RDER

Before the Court is the State’s July 30, 2018 second motion for an extension of time to

file its brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief received on July 30 filed as of the

date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE