alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed October 26, 2018.

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 17
- 00923
- CR DEVON D. ALLEN , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee
On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F16
- 00628
- U 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Evans, and Brown Opinion by Justice Evans A jury convicted Devon D. Allen for aggravated assault with a deadly we apon, a firearm, and assessed punishment at eighteen years’ imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a
brief in which s he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 81 2 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets requ irements of Anders ) . Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

– 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) ( noting appell ant has right to file pro se response to Anders brief filed by counsel).– 2

–

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824,
82 6

– 2 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/David Evans/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 170923F.U05– 3

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
DEVON D. ALLEN, Appellant
No. 05

- 17

- 00923

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F16

- 00628

- U. Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. Justices Myers and Brown participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered this 26th day of October, 2018.
#### Nick, Appellant, vs. American Lumber & Manufacturing Company, Respondent.

*January 7*

April *15, 1941.*

*380For the appellant there was a brief by *McCormick & Thiele*of Green Bay, and oral argument by *Arthur A. Thiele*and *Victor McCormick.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Strehlow & Cranston*of Green Bay, and oral argument by *Max H. Strehlow.*

The following opinion was filed February 4, 1941:

Fowler, J.

Chief Justice Rosenberry and Justices Fairchild and Wickhem are of opinion that the judgment should be affirmed. Justices Fritz and Martin and the writer are of opinion that it should be reversed. Justice Nelson takes no part. This situation results in an affirmance of the judgment. *Faust L. Co. v. Industrial Comm.*163 Wis. 365, 157 N. W. 1103.

*By the Court.*— The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

A motion for a rehearing was denied, with $25 costs, on April 15, 1941.
<Page>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.19
[MEDICAL, INCORPORATED LETTERHEAD]



May 5, 1999

Allan R. Seck
9408 Olympia Drive
Eden Praire, Minnesota 55347

Dear Al:

With reference to our discussions over the past few months and our recent
meetings, it is my pleasure to welcome you to our team at Medical Incorporated
as our Vice President for Marketing and Sales. You will be starting May 24, 1999
and will be responsible to drive our marketing efforts in international markets
and in the USA. With your track record, I am confident you can meet the
challenge of competing with giant companies and you can improve our sales
appreciably. I am also confident you will enjoy working in a small-company
environment where you are encouraged to think freely, innovate, and put your
ideas into action on fast tracks.

I offer you a base salary of $132,000 per year plus a bonus of 1% of sales over
the $3.5 million level. In addition, I offer you 100,000 options (about 2% of
current outstanding shares) to be vested over 4 years of service and exercisable
at the current fair market value of $5.00 (price of shares in our private
placement, April 1997). This offer of options will be protected against any
unanticipated decline in fair market value.

As a personal gesture to encourage your favorable decision, I offer to sell you
up to 50,000 shares of my own at a price of $2.50. This offer is good for 3
months from your employment date.

In case of a change of control, the company will pay you a bonus equivalent to 2
years salary and accelerate all options to be immediately exercisable. The
conditions of this bonus will be spelled out in a detailed agreement to be
drafted later.

Once again, welcome to our team.  It is an exciting time.

Best regards,


/s/ Adel Mikhail, Ph.D.
----------------------



Adel Mikhail, Ph.D.
President and CEO
Exhibit 10.14



                     AMENDMENT TO SOFTWARE SALE, DEVELOPMENT
                          AND PREPAID LICENSE AGREEMENT

     Ref: That certain Software Sale, Development and Prepaid License Agreement
made and entered into effective this 27th day of January, 2003 and between
PocketSpec Technologies Inc., a Colorado Corporation, hereafter referred to as
("PocketSpec"), Johann Nutter, dba Tyger POS, whose address is 1212 South Bross
Lane, Longmont, Colorado 80501 as to a 75% interest and Tyger POS - Advanced
Restaurant Technologies, LLC of P O. Bog 442, Firestone, Colorado 80520, as to
an undivided 25% interest, hereafter referred to as ("Software Provider").
PocketSpec and Software Provider agree to the following amendment:

1)   PocketSpec is confident of the success of the software products being built
     and continued to be built.

2)   Software Provider is confident of the success that PocketSpec will have in
     reselling its software.

3)   PocketSpec paid to Software Provider:

     $10,000 in checks; 190,000 shares of S-8 stock valued at $28,428; $3,072
     worth of computer equipment, all totaling $41,500, and now

     PocketSpec will issue 468,750 shares of common stock to Software Provider
     at a value of $37,500 and Software Provider has no further options to buy
     stock from PocketSpec and there is no profit participation on the sale of
     any stock. These stocks are restricted under SEC Rule 144 and application
     for sale may be made after April 30, 2004. The stocks to be issued for
     convenience as follows: 351,563 shares to Johann Nutter and 117,187 shares
     to Darrell Stevens.

     Software Provider agrees though the S-8 stock is earned, not to sell more
     that $1,000 worth of the stock that they have commencing the week of May
     12, 2003.

4)   PocketSpec's continued obligation from the sale of its software products
     described in the January 27, 2003 agreement are limited to $100 for each
     system sold after PocketSpec sells its first 300 systems and the limit of
     liability on the part of PocketSpec is $121,000 and the liability is
     strictly conditioned on the sale of software in accordance with the terms
     of the January 27, 2003 agreement, provided however, there is not liability
     to pay any additional money unless PocketSpec sells more than 300 of the
     systems provided by Software Provider.

5)   Except as set forth herein all other terms and conditions of the January
     27, 2003 agreement remain in effect. The Amendment effective this 30th day
     of April, 2003.

     THE PARTIES HAVE READ THIS AGREEMENT CAREFULLY AND UNDERSTAND ITS TERMS.

Software Provider:


/s/ Johann Nutter
---------------------------
Johann Nutter dba Tyger POS,


Tyger POS -Advanced Restaurant Technologies, LLC

/s/ Darrell Stevens
------------------------
Darrell Stevens, Manager


POCKETSPEC:



POCKETSPEC TECHNOLOGIES INC.


/s/ F. Jeffrey Krupka
----------------------------
F. Jeffrey Krupka, President
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1825

RALEIGH ANDERSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant – Appellee,

and

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION; GEORGE MCCONNELL,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior 

District Judge. (4:15-cv-00003-JLK-RSB)

Submitted: November 17, 2015 Decided: November 19, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Raleigh Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Kartic Padmanabhan, OFFICE 

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Raleigh Anderson appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to 

the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 

34(b). Because Anderson’s informal brief does not challenge the 

bases for the district court’s disposition, Anderson has 

forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, 

we grant Anderson’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and 

affirm the district court’s order. 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.

AFFIRMED
JOHN YOUNG,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-570

Opinion filed November 3, 2015.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

John Young, Pro Se, for Petitioner.

Kenneth S. Steely, General Counsel, and Barbara Debelius, Assistant General 

Counsel, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED.

BENTON, OSTERHAUS, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 631

To amend the Social Security Act to eliminate the time limitation on benefits

for immunosuppressive drugs under the Medicare Program, to provide

for continued entitlement for such drugs for certain individuals after

Medicare benefits end, and to extend certain Medicare secondary payer

requirements.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 16, 1999

Mr. DEWINE (for himself, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. INOUYE,

Mr. LEVIN, Mr. HOLLINGS, and Mr. DURBIN) introduced the following

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Social Security Act to eliminate the time

limitation on benefits for immunosuppressive drugs under

the Medicare Program, to provide for continued entitlement for such drugs for certain individuals after Medicare benefits end, and to extend certain Medicare secondary payer requirements.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Immunosuppressive

5 Drugs Coverage Act of 1999’’.
2

S 631 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF TIME LIMITATION ON MEDICARE

2 BENEFITS FOR IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE

3 DRUGS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1861(s)(2)(J) of the So5 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)(J)) is amended

6 by striking ‘‘, but only’’ and all that follows through the

7 semicolon at the end thereof.

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

9 subsection (a) shall apply to drugs furnished on or after

10 the date of the enactment of this Act.

11 SEC. 3. CONTINUED ENTITLEMENT FOR IMMUNO12 SUPPRESSIVE DRUGS FOR CERTAIN INDIVID13 UALS AFTER MEDICARE BENEFITS END.

14 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 226A(b)(2) of the Social

15 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 426–1(b)(2)) is amended by in16 serting ‘‘(except for the provision of immunosuppressive

17 drugs pursuant to section 1861(s)(2)(J))’’ after ‘‘shall

18 end’’.

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

20 subsection (a) shall apply to drugs furnished on or after

21 the date of the enactment of this Act.

22 SEC. 4. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN SECONDARY PAYER RE23 QUIREMENTS.

24 Section 1862(b)(1)(C) of the Social Security Act (42

25 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(1)(C), is amended by adding at the end

26 the following: ‘‘With regard to immunosuppressive drugs
3

S 631 IS

1 furnished on or after the date of enactment of the Im2 munosuppressive Drugs Coverage Act of 1999, this sub3 paragraph shall be applied without regard to any time lim4 itation.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         860,200
<SECURITIES>                                 2,007,706
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,121,301
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,141
<INVENTORY>                                  1,563,039
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,763,544
<PP&E>                                         983,392
<DEPRECIATION>                                 312,187
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,796,569
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,010,107
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        380
<COMMON>                                         3,525
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,027,391
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,796,569
<SALES>                                      1,350,084
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,350,084
<CGS>                                          826,095
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  826,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              69,972
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (387,468)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (387,468)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (387,594)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.10)
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

JOSE ALVARO AGUILERA-MENDOZA, 

a.k.a. Jose Alvarado Aguilera-Mendoza, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-10279 

D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00314-FJM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Frederick J. Martone, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 9, 2017**

Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Jose Alvaro Aguilera-Mendoza appeals from the district court’s order 

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. Pursuant to 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Aguilera-Mendoza’s counsel has filed a 

brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw 

 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

AUG 14 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-10279 

as counsel of record. We have provided Aguilera-Mendoza the opportunity to file 

a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has 

been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Aguilera-Mendoza’s pro se 

motion for appointment of new counsel is DENIED.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
31.1



RULE 13A-14(A)/15D-14(A) CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Ness Lakdawala, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Dectron Internationale;



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 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 most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(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.



|                                                                                               
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 19, 2006

By: /s/ Ness Lakdawala
Ness Lakdawala
Chief Executive Officer and
President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          28,669
<SECURITIES>                                    10,169
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,479
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,831
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                70,567
<PP&E>                                          30,647
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,139
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  93,339
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           38,472
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            46
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,164
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    93,339
<SALES>                                         15,355
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,823
<CGS>                                            2,376
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,090
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                19,650
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  93
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,716)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        52
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,768)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,768)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 86230]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25169]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Notice of Designation of Chinese Military Company

AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and 
Sustainment), Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of addition of a company to the Section 1260H List of 
Chinese Military Companies Operating in the United States.

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

SUMMARY: The Deputy Secretary of Defense has determined that the entity 
listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice 
qualifies as a ``Chinese military company'' in accordance with the 
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Devante Brown (GIES), (703) 695-
8545.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 1260H of the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 
(Pub. L. 116-283) requires the Secretary of Defense to make additions 
or deletions to the most recent list of ``Chinese military companies'' 
on an ongoing basis based on the latest information. Paragraph (b)(2) 
of this section requires the Secretary of Defense to publish the 
unclassified portion of such list in the Federal Register.
    The Deputy Secretary of Defense has determined that the following 
entity qualifies as a ``Chinese military company'' in accordance with 
section 1260H:

Hesai Technology Co., Ltd. (Hesai)

    Dated: October 24, 2024.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2024-25169 Filed 10-28-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6001-FR-P
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 16, 2018.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, April 16, 2018

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A18I0156. BRETT D. MCNEILL et al. v. SD&D GREENBUILT LLC..

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

2017CV284687