alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-7295

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

MONRAIL LASHUN MADDOX, a/k/a Monral Lashun Maddox, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, 

District Judge. (1:03-cr-00092-LHT-1) 

Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 21, 2008 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Monrail Lashun Maddox, Appellant Pro Se. Donald David Gast, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

 Monrail Lashun Maddox appeals a district court order 

denying his motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. 

Maddox, No. 1:03-cr-00092-LHT (W.D.N.C. July 14, 2008). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 10(x)


         On March 14, 2005, American Technical Ceramics Corp. (the "Company")
was notified that General Electric Capital Corporation ("GE Capital") approved
an increase to the Company's line of credit by $2,000,000, to an aggregate of
$6,000,000. The line of credit will expire on September 11, 2005, subject to
renewal for an additional six months upon a satisfactory review by GE Capital of
the Company's updated financial information.
#### Danny LEACH, Appellant, v. STATE of TEXAS, Appellee.

No. 21289.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 16, 1940.

Shead & Smith, of Longview, Garland G. Wier, of Gladewater, and W. A. Mc-Intosch, of Gilmer, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of' Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of robbery by assault, and his punishment assessed at five years‘confinement in the penitentiary.

Since his appeal was perfected the appellant has filed a written request, verified by his affidavit, asking for the privilege of withdrawing his appeal. The request is granted and the appeal ordered dismissed.
#### KECK v. ROBERSON.

No. 2240—7346.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section A.

July 5, 1939.

Donald & Donald, and Jerome P. Kear-by, all of Bowie, for plaintiff in error.

True Strong, of Nocona, and H. M. Muse, of Wichita Falls, for defendant in error.

GERMAN, Commissioner.

In this cause the Court of Civil Appeals declined to affirm on certificate, for the reason that no proper notice of appeal had been given, and therefore the Court was without jurisdiction. 108 S.W.2d 840.

In the case of Smith v. Free, Tex.Com. App., 107 S.W.2d 588, there was presented precisely the same situation as we have here. In that case it was held that the action of a Court of Civil Appeals in refusing to affirm on certificate was not a final judgment from which an appeal could be prosecuted to the Supreme Court. Upon authority of that case it appears that the writ of error in this instance was improvidently granted.

We are advised by counsel that this cause has reached'the Court of Civil Appeals by writ of error, just as did the case of Smith v. Free, and the objection to the action of the Court in refusing to affirm on certificate may be preserved when the cause is considered by the Court of Civil Appeals on its merits.

The application for writ of error is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court.
Exhibit 32.1






CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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 Annual Report of Moller International (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the "Report), Paul S. Moller, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the Best of his knowledge, that:
  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
   Date: 10/13/2011
  Signed:
  /s/ Paul S. Moller
  CEO and President
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000870753
<NAME>                        Numerex Corp.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Oct-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Oct-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Oct-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                         5,691
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  11,182
<ALLOWANCES>                                   167
<INVENTORY>                                    4,525
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               21,835
<PP&E>                                         7,661
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3,869
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 46,628
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          9,322
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       29,870
<OTHER-SE>                                     151
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   46,628
<SALES>                                        33,736
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          14,403
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  14,403
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               22,090
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                65
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,682
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,617)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.16)



</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 97-1310MN

_____________ Ray G. Mair, individually and as * personal representative for the Estate of * Juniet N. Mair, * * Appellant, *

* v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District Hagerty, Johnson, Albrightson & Beitz, * of Minnesota. P.A., a Minnesota professional * corporation; James Anthony Beitz; * [UNPUBLISHED] David W. Johnson, individually; * Popham, Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufman, * Ltd., a Minnesota Limited Partnership; * Raymond Haik, individually, * * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: October 20, 1997

Filed: October 30, 1997

_____________ Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Ray G. Mair, individually and as person al representative for the Estate of Juniet N. Mair, appeals the adverse grants of summary judgment to the law firms sued b y Mair on state law claims for malpractice. We review a grant of summary judgment-2-

unde r a well-established standard. Because this is a diversity action, we review d e novo q uestions of state law. Having considered the record and the parties' briefs, we are satisf ied the district court correctly applied controlling state law, and the record supports the district court's rulings. We also conclude a comprehensive opinion in this diversity case would lack precedential value. We thus affirm on the basis of the district court's rulings without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### LAMPIN v. STATE.

No. 20099.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 25, 1939.

Sam T. Holt and Fred Whitaker, both of Carthage, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for theft of cattle, punishment assessed being five years in the penitentiary.

The indictment appears to be in proper form. The record contains neither statement of facts, nor bills of exception, in which condition nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999             SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          12,647                   3,530
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,439                  19,052
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,076                     827
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                       1,852,779               1,804,884
<DEPRECIATION>                                  89,333                  59,090
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,939,878               1,876,897
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                    100,000                 100,000
<COMMON>                                           400                     399
<OTHER-SE>                                     726,952                 755,647
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,939,878               1,876,897
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               221,983                 171,893
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  167,710                 121,540
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,530                  28,245
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 50,852                  58,687
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                   8,908
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    50,852                  49,779
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.21                    1.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.21                    1.17


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          19,002
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,213
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (231)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,316
<PP&E>                                           6,298
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,871)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,591
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,097
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,832
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,188
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    33,591
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,640
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,347
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    708
<INCOME-TAX>                                       576
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                120
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       120
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.02
        

</TABLE>
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D21-1796

_____________________________

BLAKE THURMAN and SAMANTHA 

THURMAN,

Appellants,

v.

DEBBIE ROSE DAVIS, f/k/a Debbie 

Rose Thurman,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County.

Timothy Register, Judge.

September 8, 2021

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED.

B.L. THOMAS, M.K. THOMAS, and LONG, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jeremy A. Mutz of the Law Office of Jeremy A. Mutz, Chipley, for 

Appellants.

No appearance for Appellee.
EXHIBIT 10.4


 


MODIFICATION TO
PROMISSORY NOTE


 


 


WHEREAS,
on March 15, 1993, Lee Pharmaceuticals (“Maker”) and Henry L. Lee, Jr.
(“Holder”) entered into an agreement (“Note”) whereby Lee Pharmaceuticals was
to pay to Henry L. Lee, Jr. the sum of Three Hundred Seventy One Thousand
Three Hundred Thirty Four Dollars; and


 


WHEREAS,
on January 18, 1995, the parties thereto modified said Note to extend the
maturity date from November 15, 1997, until January 1, 2005, and the
Note had an option to extend the maturity date for an additional five years
beyond January 1, 2005.  All other
terms and conditions of the Note remained the same.


 


WHEREAS,
the parties thereto now desire to further modify said Note and Modification;


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, the parties modify said Note and Modification as follows:


 


1.      The
maturity date of the Note is extended from January 1, 2005, until January 1,
2010.


 


2.      All other
terms and conditions of the Note remain the same.


 


 


Dated  this  24th 
day  of  February,
 2005


 


 


	
   

  	
  RONALD
  G. LEE

  
	
   

  	
  Lee Pharmaceuticals

  
	
   

  	
  By: Ronald G. Lee,
  President

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  HENRY
  L. LEE, JR.

  
	
   

  	
  Henry L. Lee, Jr.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0205 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. PABLO ANTONIO VILLALOBOS,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including February 21 , 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 8 2024

01/08/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0205
Exhibit 32: Section 1350 Certifications

I, Barbara A. Manzolillo, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, certify this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Medical Information Technology, Inc. for the period ended September 30, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

October 31, 2007(Date)

Barbara A. Manzolillo, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer(Signature)

I, A. Neil Pappalardo, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, certify this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Medical Information Technology, Inc. for the period ended September 30, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

October 31, 2007(Date)

A. Neil Pappalardo, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman(Signature)
<PAGE>   1
          EXHIBIT 23 TO ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR FRONTSTEP, INC.


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
<PAGE>   2

                                                                      Exhibit 23


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors
Frontstep, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on
Form S-3 (Nos. 333-42894) and Form S-8 (Nos. 33-40546, 33-45416, 33-73014,
33-73016, 333-660, 333-10631, 33-10633, 333-43947, and 333-91811) of Frontstep,
Inc. of our report dated August 13, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance
sheet of Frontstep, Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2001, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity and cash flows for
the year ended June 30, 2001, which report appears in the June 30, 2001 annual
report on Form 10-K of Frontstep, Inc.


/s/ KPMG LLP


Columbus, Ohio
September 27, 2001
<PAGE>   3
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Forms S-8 No. 33-40546, No. 33-45416, No. 33-73014, No. 33-73016, No. 333-660,
No. 333-10631, No. 333-10633, No. 333-43947, and No. 333-91811, and Form S-3
No. 333-42894) of Frontstep, Inc. (formerly Symix Systems, Inc.) of our report
dated July 27, 2000, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of
Frontstep, Inc. (formerly Symix Systems, Inc.) as of June 30, 2000 and the
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash
flows for each of the two years in the period ended June 30, 2000 included in
this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Frontstep, Inc.

                                                  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Columbus, Ohio
September 27, 2001
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 232 (Friday, December 1, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 75313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30623]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-37,997]


Louisiana Pacific Corporation Western Division Hayden Lake, 
Idaho; Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on August 21, 2000 in response to a worker petition which 
was filed by the company on behalf of workers at Louisiana Pacific 
Corporation, Western Division, Hayden Lake, Idaho.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC this 1st day of November, 2000.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-30623 Filed 11-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Dave Côté, CEO of Packeteer, Inc., certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Packeteer, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) andinternal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or causedsuch internal control over financial reporting to be designed underour supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding thereliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financialstatements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors: (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Dated:  October 28, 2005 /s/ Dave Côté   Dave Côté   Chief Executive Officer