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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7633

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RYAN LAMAR HOLLAND,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at 

Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, Chief District Judge. (1:10-cr-00445-TDS-1; 1:17-

cv-01007-TDS-LPA)

Submitted: April 19, 2018 Decided: April 23, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ryan Lamar Holland, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ryan Lamar Holland seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 

473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district 

court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the 

dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of 

the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Holland has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the 

appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
EX-10.1.51



 Exhibit 10.1.51 

THE USE OF THE FOLLOWING NOTATION IN THIS EXHIBIT INDICATES THAT THE 

CONFIDENTIAL PORTION HAS BEEN OMITTED PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR 

CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT AND THE OMITTED MATERIAL HAS BEEN FILED 

SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION: [***] 

 

Amendment One (to Unified In-Flight Connectivity Hardware, 

Services and Maintenance Agreement) 


AMENDMENT ONE (TO UNIFIED IN-FLIGHT CONNECTIVITY HARDWARE, 

SERVICES AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT) 

This Amendment One (this “Amendment”) to the Unified In-Flight Connectivity Hardware,
Services and Maintenance Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2017 (the “Original Agreement”), by and between American Airlines, Inc. (“American”) and Gogo LLC (“Gogo”) (collectively the “Parties” and
individually a “Party”), is made and entered into this 21st day of May, 2017 (the “Execution Date”). 

WHEREAS, American and Gogo desire to amend the terms of the Original Agreement to add certain additional
regional jet aircraft to the scope of coverage thereunder. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the foregoing premises and the covenants contained herein, American and Gogo agree as follows: 
  

	1	Amendments. As of the Execution Date, the Original Agreement is hereby amended by adding the contents of Attachment 1 hereto to [Section A-2 of Exhibit A] to the
Original Agreement 

  

	2	Delivery. For the purposes of Section 7.7 of the Original Agreement, the scheduled delivery date for each Shipset associated with Aircraft on Attachment 1 hereto is [***]. 


 

	3	Entire Agreement/Amendment. This Amendment constitutes the full and complete understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Amendment and supersedes all prior agreements and
understandings between the Parties with respect to the subject matter. This Amendment may be modified only by written agreement signed by an authorized representative of both Parties 


 

	4	Effectiveness of Agreement. The Original Agreement remains in full force and effect, except as specifically amended by this Amendment. 


  
 Page 1 










	
	 Amendment One (to Unified In-Flight
Connectivity Hardware,
 Services and Maintenance Agreement)



 


									
			
	Gogo LLC.	 		 	AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
					
	By:	 	 /s/ John Happ
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Spencer Dickinson

					
	Name:	 	John Happ	 		 	Name:	 	Spencer Dickinson
					
	Title:	 	EVP, Regional President	 		 	Title:	 	MD, Procurement Aircraft Programs
			
	Date: 7/12/2017	 		 	Date: 7/20/2017


  
 American Airlines
Confidential and Proprietary 
 Page 2 










	
	 Amendment One (to Unified In-Flight
Connectivity Hardware,
 Services and Maintenance Agreement)



 

 Attachment 1 to Amendment One 

[***] 

  
 American Airlines
Confidential and Proprietary 
 Page 3
**Exhibit 23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration StatementNo. 33-41204 on Form S-8, as amended by Amendment No. 1 to Form S-8 No. 333-04888, and Nos. 333-14925 and 333-43018 on Forms S-8 of our report dated March 2, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Brown &Brown, Inc. and subsidiaries (“Brown & Brown”), and the effectiveness of Brown & Brown’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Brown & Brown for the yearended December 31, 2008. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

Jacksonville, Florida 

March 2, 2009
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23
 

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
                         -----------------------------

The Board of Directors of
J. C. Penney Company, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form
S-8 (Nos. 33-28390, 33-59666, 33-59668, 33-66070, 33-66072, 33-56995, 333-13949,
333-13951, 333-22627, 333-22607, 33-33343, 333-27329, 333-71237) and Form S-3
(No. 333-57019) of J.C. Penney Company, Inc. of our report dated February 25,
1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of J. C. Penney Company, Inc.
and subsidiaries as of January 30, 1999 and January 31, 1998, and the related
consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended January 30, 1999, which report is
incorporated by reference in the January 30, 1999 Annual Report on Form 10-K of
J.C. Penney Company, Inc. and to our report dated February 25, 1999 on the
related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the January 30,
1999 Annual Report on Form 10-K of J. C. Penney Company, Inc.


                                       /s/ KPMG LLP

Dallas, Texas
April 23, 1999
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE
          SHEETS, CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
          AND CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS INCLUDED
          IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE  PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30,
          1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
          FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         330,605
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,984
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               362,028
<PP&E>                                         166,214
<DEPRECIATION>                                  28,754
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 624,051
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           75,639
<BONDS>                                        525,375
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            83
<OTHER-SE>                                     (15,553)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   624,051
<SALES>                                         72,586
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                72,586
<CGS>                                           62,706
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   62,706
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                40,960
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,985
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (43,065)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (43,065)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (43,065)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.53)



</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, William V. Carney, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Porta Systems Corp.;

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

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial  condition,  results of operations and 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 maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

      a)  designed  such  disclosure  controls  and  procedures,  or caused such
      disclosure  controls and procedures to be designed under our  supervision,
      to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,  including
      its consolidated 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 and
      procedures  and  presented  in  this  report  our  conclusions  about  the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,  as of the end of
      the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

      c)  disclosed  in this  report  any  change in the  registrant's  internal
      control over  financial  reporting that occurred  during the  registrant's
      fourth  fiscal  quarter that has  materially  affected,  or is  reasonably
      likely to  materially  affect,  the  registrant's  internal  control  over
      financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,  based on our
most recent  evaluation of internal  control over  financial  reporting,  to the
registrant's  auditors  and the audit  committee  of the  registrant's  board of
directors:

      a) all significant  deficiencies and material  weaknesses in the design or
      operation  of  internal   control  over  financial   reporting  which  are
      reasonably likely 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 other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
      over financial reporting.


                                                        /s/ William V. Carney
                                                        -----------------------
Dated: March 31, 2005                                   William V. Carney
                                                        Chief Executive Officer
# C_2022485EN.01009401.xml

| 21.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 485/94 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 485/94

---

Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 485/05)

| Member State | Spain |
| --- | --- |
| Route concerned | Menorca-Madrid |
| Reopening date of the PSO route to community air carriers | 1 May 2023 |
| Address where the text and any other information or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained. | Ministerio de Transportes, Movilidad y Agenda |
| Urbana |
| Dirección General de Aviación Civil |
| Subdirección General de Transporte Aéreo |
| Paseo de la Castellana 67 |
| 28071 Madrid |
| España |

Member State

Spain

Route concerned

Menorca-Madrid

Reopening date of the PSO route to community air carriers

1 May 2023

Address where the text and any other information or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained.

Ministerio de Transportes, Movilidad y Agenda

Urbana

Dirección General de Aviación Civil

Subdirección General de Transporte Aéreo

Paseo de la Castellana 67

28071 Madrid

España

Tel. +34 91 597 7837

Fax +34 91 597 8643

e-mail address: osp.dgac@mitma.es

The routes subject to public service obligations may be operated on the basis of free competition access as from 1 May 2023. In the event that no air carrier submits a program of services compliant with the public service obligations imposed, access will be restricted from 1 November 2023 to 30 April 2024 to a single air carrier through the corresponding public tender procedure, in accordance with Article 16 (9) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008.

---
#### MELANCON et al. v. FIRST NAT. BANK OF MISSION.

No. 9433.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

March 1, 1934.

Rehearing Denied March 1, 1934.

J. Q. Henry and B. H. Oxford, both of Mission, for appellants.

Hill & Greer, of Mission, for appellee.

SMITH, Justice.

In this case appellants filed in the court below their, affidavit of inability to pay the costs of appeal, and prayed for an order allowing them to appeal upon said affidavit in lieu of bond. The affidavit was duly controverted by appellee, and upon a hearing the trial judge found that the “facts contained in the affidavit * 3⁄8 1⁄8. are untrue,” and denied appellants’ prayer for an appeal upon said affidavit. Appellants did not pursue their remedy of mandamus, but sought to appeal directly from the order denying appeal in forma pauperis.

The order upon which appellants base their appeal is not a final judgment within the statutes providing for appeal to this court. It is no more than an interlocutory order in limine.

The process of prosecuting appeals in forma pauperis is a purely statutory proceeding. Article 2266, as amended by- the Acts of 1931, 42d Leg., p. 226, ch. 134, § 1 (Vernon’s Ann. Civ. St. art. 2266), and article 2278a, as amended by the Acts of 1930, 41st Leg., 4th C. S., p. 91, ch. 50, § 1 (Vernon’s Ann. Civ. St. art. 2278a). As no provision is made in the *539statute for appeals from orders of trial courts denying appeals in such cases, none can be presumed or improvised by tbe courts.

The statutes prescribe the character of interlocutory orders from which appeals may be prosecuted. Articles 2250, 2251, R. S. 1926. The right of appeal is limited to those specified. This is elemental. The case presented here is not embraced among those prescribed, and the appeal does not lie.

Appellee’s motion to dismiss was granted for the reasons stated.
### MANDATE



## Court of Appeals

**First District of Texas**

NO. 01

- 12

- 01087

- CV

ARNOLD J. WEBRE, JR. AND JO KATHRYN GROSS , Appellants

V.

RAY BLACK, JR., GUAR DIAN OF THE ESTATE O F ARNOLD J. WEBRE, SR., AN

INCAPACITATED PERSON , Appellee

Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2 of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 394,381).

TO THE PROBATE COURT NO. 2 OF HARRIS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before this Court, on the 13th day of January 2015, the case upon appeal to revise

or to reverse your judgment was determined. This Court made its order in these words:

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed

by the trial court on October 25, 2012. After submitting the

case on the appellate record and the arguments properly

raised by the parties, the Court holds that there was reversible

error in the trial court’s judgment. Accordingly, the Court

reverses the trial court’s judgment and remands the case to

the trial cou rt for further proceedings.

The Court orders that the appellee, Ray Black, Jr.,

Guardian of the Estate of Arnold J. Webre, Sr., an

Incapacitated Person, pay all appellate costs.The Court orders that this decision be certified below

for observance.

J udgment rendered January 13 , 2015.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices

Massengale and Huddle. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice

Radack.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court

in this behalf and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

March 27 , 2015

Date CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK OF THE COURT
#### SAN LORENZO TITLE & IMPROVEMENT COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error, v. E. A. CAPLES et al., Defendants in Error.

*No. 6265.*

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 30, 1934.

McKenzie, Walthall *&*Gamble, J. U. Sweeney, J. E. Quaid, F. C. Knollenberg, E. F. Cameron, and Sydney Smith, all of El Paso, for plaintiff in error.

Roy D. Jackson, Richard F. Burges, Walter S. Howe, and Turney, Burgos, Culwell *&*Pollard, all of El Paso, for defendants in error.

PIERSON, Justice.

This case also is a companion case to. San Lorenzo Title & Improvement Company v. City Mortgage Company (Tex. Sup.) 73 S.W.(2d) 513, opinion reported today. Also, it is a companion case to San Lorenzo Title *&*Improvement Company v. Allie D. Clardy et al. (Tex. Sup.) 73 S.W.(2d) 516, opinion delivered today.

This case also involves the title to lots of land situated on San Lorenzo Banco No. 302. The difference between this case and the two mentioned above is that in this case the district court overruled the general demurrer of defendants in error and the case was tried on facts. A verdict was rendered for defendants in error, and judgment was entered accordingly. Hon. P. R. Price, Judge of the Forty-First Judicial District, tried the three cases, and the Court of Civil Appeals likewise affirmed the judgment for defendants in error in this case. 48 S.W.(2d) 329.

These three cases have had most thorough *517judicial consideration by tbe district court and the Court of Civil Appeals.

After careful and painstaking study of the record and the law in this case, as in the other two, we affirm the judgments of the district court and the Court of Civil Appeals for the reasons stated in our opinion in the City Mortgage Company Case, supra, and the able opinions of the Court of Civil Appeals in the three cases.
# Official Journal C 199/6 Au

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 199 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 476 August 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 199

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 476 August 2004

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2004/C 199/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2004/C 199/2 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3504 — UTC/IHI) (1) | 2 |
| 2004/C 199/3 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3427 — SITA/SOL/JÄTEÄSSÄT/HYÖTYKESKUS JV) (1) | 2 |
| 2004/C 199/4 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3477 — LAND NRW/NRW BANK) (1) | 3 |
| 2004/C 199/5 | Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping and countervailing measures | 4 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2004/C 199/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2004/C 199/2

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3504 — UTC/IHI) (1)

2

2004/C 199/3

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3427 — SITA/SOL/JÄTEÄSSÄT/HYÖTYKESKUS JV) (1)

2

2004/C 199/4

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3477 — LAND NRW/NRW BANK) (1)

3

2004/C 199/5

Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping and countervailing measures

4

---

| | III   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | Commission |
| 2004/C 199/6 | Notice | 5 |

III   Notices

Commission

2004/C 199/6

Notice

5

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

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

EN
EXHIBIT 32.2



                       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 Annual Report of Portsmouth Square, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I David T. Nguyen, Treasurer and Controller of the Company,
serving as Chief Financial Officer, certify, 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 my knowledge, 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.


Date: September 28, 2007                        /s/ David T. Nguyen
                                                ----------------------------
                                                David T. Nguyen, Treasurer
                                                and Controller (serving as
                                                Chief Financial Officer)




[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Portsmouth Square, Inc. and will be retained by Portsmouth
Square, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.]
EXHIBIT 32e

Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18
of the United States Code

I,
Thomas M. OFlynn, Chief Financial Officer of Public Service Electric and Gas
Company, to the best of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Annual Report of
Public Service Electric and Gas Company on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange 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 Public Service Electric
and Gas Company.

| |                                         
| | ----------------------------------------
| | /s/
 Thomas M. OFlynn                  
| |                                         
| | Thomas M. OFlynn                       
| | Public
 Service Electric and Gas Company
| | Chief
 Financial Officer                
| | February
 26, 2009                      

---