alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER OF A BATEMENT

Appellate case name: Elena Markovsky v. Kirby Tower, L.P.

Appellate case number: 01

- 13

- 00516

- CV

Trial court case number: 2009

- 03458

Trial court: 11th District Court of H arris County

Appellant Elena Markovsky has moved to abate this appeal to permit the trial

court to render a final judgment. See McNally v. Guevara , 52 S.W.3d 195, 196 (Tex.

2001)

. The motion is GRANTED. The appeal is abated and removed from this Court’ s

active docket to permit the trial court to render a final judgment. If a supplemental

clerk’s record containing a final judgment is not received within 30 days of the date of

this order, the appeal will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless Marko vsky moves

to extend the abatement and an extension is granted

. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a),

43.2(f); McNally , 52 S.W.3d at 196.

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this Court’s

active docket. The appeal will be reinstated o n this Court’s active docket when a

supplemental clerk’s record containing a final judgment is filed in this Court.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: September 25, 2014
exv10w1



 






Exhibit 10.1




DESCRIPTION OF THE 2005 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN




Purpose



On January 26, 2005, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Committee”) of
EchoStar Communications Corporation (“EchoStar”) approved a long-term, performance-based stock
incentive plan (the “2005 LTIP”) within the terms of EchoStar’s 1999 Stock Incentive Plan. The
purpose of the 2005 LTIP is to promote EchoStar’s interests and the interests of EchoStar’s
stockholders by providing key employees with financial rewards through equity participation upon
achievement of specified long-term business objectives.



Eligibility



The employees eligible to participate in the 2005 LTIP include EchoStar’s executive officers, vice
presidents, director-level employees and certain other key employees designated by the Committee.



Types of Awards



Employees participating in the 2005 LTIP may elect to receive a one-time award of (i) an option to
acquire a specified number of shares priced at $29.25 (the closing price of EchoStar’s Class A
Common Stock on March 31, 2005); (ii) rights (“restricted performance units”) to acquire for no
additional consideration a specified smaller number of shares of EchoStar’s Class A Common Stock;
or (iii) a corresponding combination of a lesser number of option shares and restricted performance
units.



Grant Date and Vesting



Options to purchase approximately 3.3 million shares and approximately 478,000 restricted
performance units were granted under the 2005 LTIP as of March 31, 2005. The options and
restricted performance units vest at the rate of 10% per year commencing on March 31, 2006 until
March 31, 2009 and then at the rate of 20% per year thereafter (or at another rate determined by
the Committee); provided, however, that none of the options or restricted performance units will
vest if EchoStar fails to achieve the certain specified long-term performance goal.



Administration



The Committee retains the right to modify the terms of the 2005 LTIP.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATE OF CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER**

This Certificate is being delivered pursuant to the requirements of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 (Mail Fraud) of Title 18 (Crimes and CriminalProcedures) of the United States Code and shall not be relied on by any person for any other purpose.

The undersigned, who is the Chief Executive Officer of CCFHolding Company (the “Company”), hereby certifies as follows:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q****of theCompany (the “Report”), which accompanies this Certificate, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and all information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 14th day of August, 2003.

 

|   |   |   |                                         |
|--------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------|
|        |   |   | /s/ DAVID B. TURNER                          |
|   |   |   |                                              |
|   |   |   | **David B. Turner, Chief Executive Officer** |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the small business issuer and will be retained by the small business issuer and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Federal Advisory Committee on Insurance

Agenda

August 17, 2017

1:00 – 1:10 Welcome & Introductions 

1:10 – 2:10 Insurance Marketplace Update

 • Property & Casualty

 Sean Kevelighan, Chief Executive Ocer, Insurance Information Institute

 • Life & Health

 Bob Kerzner, Chief Executive Ocer, LIMRA

2:10 – 3:10 Advanced Analytics and Big Data in the Insurance Industry 

 • Ethical Considerations of Data Aggregation

 Kirsten Martin, Associate Professor, George Washington University

 • Articial Intelligence 

 Jim Bramblet, Managing Director, Property & Casualty and Digital Lead 

 North America Insurance, Accenture 

 Sharad Sachdev, Managing Director, Articial Intelligence and Analytics, 

 Accenture 

3:10 – 3:25 Break

3:25 – 4:40 Cyber Insurance Coverage 

 • Introduction to Cyber Coverage and Enterprise Risk Management 

 Ryan Gibney, Vice President, Northeast Cyber Technology Practice Leader, 

 Lockton Companies, LLC

 • Cyber Insurance Underwriting Processes 

 Tracie Grella, Global Head of Cyber Risk Insurance, AIG

 John Coletti, Chief Underwriting Ocer, Cyber and Technology, Insurance, XL Catlin 

4:40 – 4:50 Federal Insurance Oce Update

 Steven Seitz, Deputy Director, Federal Insurance Oce, 

 U.S. Department of the Treasury

4:50 – 5:00 New Business

 • Set date for next meeting

5:00 Adjourn
EXHIBIT 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Ever-Glory International Group, Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Kang Yihua, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and 

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

 
By:  /s/ Kang Yihua Kang Yihua Chief Executive Officer 
 

 
November 14, 2006
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

MICHAEL NATHAN MARTINEZ, §

#1303718, §

PETITIONER, §

§

V. § CIVIL CASE NO. 3:22-CV-1389-E-BK

§

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, §

RESPONDENT. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in 

this case. No objections were filed. The court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and 

recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, 

and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

SO ORDERED this 31st day of March, 2023.

Case 3:22-cv-01389-E-BK Document 11 Filed 03/31/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 53
Exhibit 32.5

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 Trump Entertainment Resorts Funding, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mark Juliano, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 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 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 Registrant.



|                   |  |                                                                     
|------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 12, 2010 |  | /s/ MARK JULIANO                                                    
|                   |  | Mark Juliano                                                        
|                   |  | Chief Executive Officer of
Trump Entertainment Resorts Funding, Inc.
EXHIBIT
32.1




RULE
13a - 14(b) CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF




FINANCIAL
OFFICER




Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officers of Source Interlink
Companies, Inc. (the "Corporation") hereby certify that the Corporation's
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended April 30, 2008 (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Corporation.





Dated:
      June 6, 2008
              
              /s/
      MICHAEL R. DUCKWORTH
              ------------------------------------------
              Name:  Michael
      R. Duckworth
              Title:
      Chairman of the Board of Directors
              
              /s/
      MARC FIERMAN
              ------------------------------------------
              Name:  Marc
      Fierman
              Title:
      Chief Financial Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 22, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-50749

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

OLIVO MEJIA-SOLANO,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:04-CR-74-1-AML

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

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Olivo Mejia-Solano (Mejia) appeals his sentence following

his guilty-plea conviction of illegal reentry, in violation of 

8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). The district court sentenced him

to 41 months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release,

and a $100 special assessment. 

Mejia argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional

under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), because it

does not require the fact of a prior felony or aggravated-felony
No. 04-50749

-2-

conviction to be charged in the indictment and proved beyond a

reasonable doubt. As Mejia concedes, this argument is foreclosed

by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and

Almendarez-Torres was not overruled by Apprendi. See United

States v. Sarmiento-Funes, 374 F.3d 336, 346 (5th Cir. 2004). 

For the first time on appeal, Mejia argues that, under

United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (5th Cir. 2005), this

court must vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing

because the mandatory guideline regime was in place at the time

of his sentencing. An unpreserved challenge to the computation

of a defendant’s sentence under the formerly mandatory sentencing

guidelines is reviewed for plain error. United States v. Mares,

402 F.3d 511, 520-21 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed

(Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517). 

The district court’s application of the guidelines in their

mandatory form constituted error that is “plain” for purposes of

satisfying the first two prongs of the plain error analysis. See

United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo, 407 F.3d 728, 733 (5th Cir. 

2005). Mejia also bears the burden of demonstrating “that the

sentencing judge--sentencing under an advisory scheme rather than

a mandatory one--would have reached a significantly different

result.” See Mares, 402 F.3d at 521. Mejia has failed to make

such a showing. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court

is AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Arroyo, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx *318County (Dominic Massaro, J.), rendered March 28, 1988, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him to two concurrent sentences of from 1 to 3 years’ imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s conviction arises out of a "buy-and-bust” operation at Aqueduct Park in the Bronx. The undercover officer bought heroin from codefendant Nieves and then observed Nieves walk over to defendant and give him a glassine envelope. Defendant was then observed giving a third party a glassine of heroin in exchange for currency. Defendant and Nieves were jointly charged with both sales as well as related possession counts.

Defendant’s claim that the court improperly instructed the jury that a narcotics buyer could be held criminally liable for the conduct of a narcotics seller, which was apparently an unintentional misstatement, is unpreserved for appellate review as no objection was made at the trial level. Defendant’s claims of error on summation and cross-examination are similarly unpreserved. Defendant claims, *inter alia,*that the prosecutor should not have commented that defendant was an interested witness, and that the police had no motive to lie. If we were to reach these issues in the interest of justice, we would find them to be without merit. Concur—Carro, J. P., Asch, Kassal and Smith, JJ.
EX-10.8



 




Exhibit 10.8


AMENDMENT AGREEMENT




     THIS AMENDMENT AGREEMENT is made as of March 22, 2005, by and between Century Aluminum
Company, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and David W. Beckley (the “Executive”).



RECITALS




     A. The Company and the Executive are parties to an Employment Agreement, made as of January 1,
2002, pursuant to which the parties agreed that the Company would employ Executive as Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. The Employment Agreement was amended as of December 9,
2003. That amended agreement is hereafter referred to as the “Employment Agreement”.



     B. Executive has expressed his interest in retiring from the Company prior to December 31,
2005. The Company believes it is in the best interest of the Company to have Executive serve until
December 31, 2005.



     C. Executive is willing to continue his employment with the Company on the terms and
conditions set forth in this Amendment Agreement.



     THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:



     1. Term of Employment. Executive agrees he will continue to serve the Company as its
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer through December 31, 2005. Executive also
agrees he shall make himself available to consult with the Company after December 31, 2005, as may
be reasonably requested by the Company.



     2. Special Bonus. Provided Executive satisfactorily completes his service as provided
in paragraph 1. of this Amendment Agreement, Executive shall be paid early in calendar year 2006 a
special bonus equal in amount to 50% of his then current base pay. This special bonus shall be in
addition to all other compensation he shall be entitled to receive under his Employment Agreement
or otherwise.



     3. Incorporation of Amendment Agreement and SPA. Except as explicitly set forth in
the Amendment Agreement, the parties do not intend to modify the terms and conditions of the
Employment Agreement or the SPA, those terms and conditions shall remain in full force and effect,
and they shall be incorporated into this Amendment Agreement by this reference.



 









 





	 	 	 	 	 
	CENTURY ALUMINUM COMPANY	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ Gerald J. Kitchen
	 	 
	

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Title:

	 	Executive Vice President	 	 
	

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	

	 	/s/ David W. Beckley	 	 
	

	 	 	 	 
	

	 	David W. Beckley
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

MALIK ABDUL JAMERSON BEY,

Plaintiff,

v. No. 4:22-CV-00988-P

396TH DISTRICT COURT, TARRANT 

COUNTY, TEXAS ET AL.,

Defendants.

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, 

and a Recommendation in this case. ECF No. 18. No objections were 

filed, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is ripe for review. 

The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District 

Judge finds that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge 

are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of 

the Court. 

The Court therefore ORDERS that this case is DISMISSED for lack 

of prosecution, without prejudice to being refiled. 

SO ORDERED on this 20th day of January 2023.

Mark T. Pittman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cv-00988-P Document 19 Filed 01/20/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 385
# Official Journal C 9/12 J

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 9 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5912 January 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 9

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5912 January 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 009/1 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2016/C 009/2 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  2
  ) | 6 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 009/1

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

2016/C 009/2

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  2
  )

2

6

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |
| | (2)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

(2)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty

2

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
EX-10.4



 Exhibit 10.4 
  

			
		 	 




  

		 	                        Corporate
		 	                        Millennium Way West
		 	                        Phoenix Centre
		 	                        Nottingham
		 	                        NG8 6AW
	 R.Smith Esq.
 4 Skegby Hall Gardens

Skegby
 Sutton-in-Ashfield

Nottinghamshire
 NG17 3FX
	 	
                        UK

 

                        T: +44 (0) 115
979 6300
                         F:
+44 (0) 115 975 0600
  

                        
www.multlpkg.com


 Dear Rick, 
 RE: Amendment to
your employment agreement dated 30 September 2014 (your “Employment Agreement”) 
 As discussed with you, we agree to make the following
changes to your Employment Agreement with immediate effect: 
  

	 	1)	extend the Validity Period (as defined and referred to in your Employment Agreement) so that it will now terminate on 30 June 2015; 


 

	 	2)	your new title will be “Executive Vice President, Asia, Corporate Development and Technical Services”; and 

  

	 	3)	you will now report to Marc Shore. 

 All other terms set out is or referred to in your Employment Agreement
remain unaffected by the terms of this letter. 
 Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any queries regarding the above. Otherwise, please sign
and date the duplicate of this letter attached and return it to me to confirm your agreement to the amendments of your Employment Agreement set out in this letter. 
  

	
	Your sincerely,
	
	/s/ Mike Cheetham

 I, Rick Smith, confirm that I have read and understood the terms of the letter and agree to the amendments to my Employment
Agreement set out in this letter. 
  

					
	/s/ Rick Smith	 		 	 11/12/2014

			
	Signature	 		 	Date
#### DAVIDSON v. STATE.

No. 21956.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 18, 1942.

Polk Shelton, of Austin, for appellant.

*996Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The transcript in this case contains no caption showing when the term of court began or when it ended. We find among the papers of the case some loose sheets typewritten which are not certified to, which probably intended to show this fact, but they are not proper for our consideration.

The appeal is dismissed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Donald McKinnon, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), rendered December 20, 1988, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claims regarding the jury charge and the sufficiency of the evidence of "physical injury” are unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Bynum,*70 NY2d 858; *People v Ford,*62 NY2d 275; *see also, People v Ahmed,*66 NY2d 307; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245, 248-252). Under the circumstances of this case, we decline to address these issues in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Bracken, J. P., Kooper, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.