alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-20532 Conference Calendar

BRUCE LEE WILLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus MR. N. BATES; MRS. C. RICHARDS; MR. TOLLIVER; MRS. MOSELY; MRS. TRAPPIO; MRS. GRAHAM; MR. L. LENTZ; MR. C. WABARA; ASSISTANT REGIONAL DIRECTOR; INTERNAL AFFAIRS; JOHN CLAYMAN; BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-01-CV-1156

-------------------- October 29, 2002 Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Bruce Lee Willis, Texas prisoner #717354, appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his pro se , in forma pauperis (IFP) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court reasoned that Willis’ suit was barred by Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477 (1994), and Edwards v. Balisok , 520 U.S. 641 (1997),No. 02-20532 -2- because all of his claims in some way related to the revocation of his parole. Willis’ brief fails to address any issue that is before this court. Willis recounts the facts surrounding his termination by an unnamed corporation and its parent company based upon a “dirty uranalysis.” The district court denied Willis’ motion to add the unnamed corporation as a defendant, however, and Willis has not challenged the denial of said motion. The remainder of Willis’ brief discusses the facts underlying his claims against the defendants. Willis does not dispute the district court’s determination that his claims against the defendants are barred by Heck and Edwards
. Because Willis does not address on appeal the district court’s reason for dismissing his civil rights action, he has abandoned the only issue on appeal. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Willis’ appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous.
See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous constitutes one strike for purposes of the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) bar. Adepegba
v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). We caution Willis that once he accumulates three strikes, he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated orNo. 02-20532 -3- detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; WARNING ISSUED.
EXHIBIT
32.1
 
 SECTION
1350 CERTIFICATIONS
  In
connection with the Annual Report of Glen Burnie Bancorp (the “Company”) on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission and to which this Certification is an exhibit (the
“Report”), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
   (1)
    The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
   (2)
    The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company
      for the periods reflected therein.
 Date: March 10,
2005
    By:
    /s/ F. William Kuethe,
      Jr.F. William Kuethe,
      Jr.President, Chief Executive Officer


| |                                             |                     
| | ------------------------------------------- | --------------------
| |                                             |                     
| | By:                                         | /s/ John E.
  Porter
| |                                            
| | John E. PorterChief Financial
      Officer
| |                                            
| |                                            
| |                                            
| |                                            
| |                                            
| |                                            
| |
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Monty K. Allen, the principal financial officer of LightPath Technologies, Inc. certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Light Path Technologies, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact 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 presentin 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 definedin 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, includingits 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 conclusionsabout 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 controls over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol 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 controls overfinancial 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 significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date:August 25, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB FOR THE YEAR ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       455,359
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                     3,104,940
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                4,982,662
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                    47,767,121
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                      48,231,573
<LOANS>                                   66,417,985
<ALLOWANCE>                                  301,952
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           128,016,751
<DEPOSITS>                                89,377,718
<SHORT-TERM>                              16,000,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                        1,577,905
<LONG-TERM>                                9,000,000
<COMMON>                                   3,057,510
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<OTHER-SE>                                 9,003,618
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           128,016,751
<INTEREST-LOAN>                            5,309,865
<INTEREST-INVEST>                          3,396,722
<INTEREST-OTHER>                             256,768
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           8,963,355
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                         3,787,690
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         1,557,800
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                      3,617,865
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                 81,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                            2,659,123
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            2,340,635
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                 2,340,635
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                               1,549,835
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   0.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0.90
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                  7.55
<LOANS-NON>                                   17,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                       0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              121,136
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             273,819
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                 54,387
<RECOVERIES>                                   1,520
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            301,952
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         301,952
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            0
        

</TABLE>
99-222.

#### Karr v. Borchardt.

Seneca App. No. 13-98-36.. Discretionary appeal allowed; *sua sponte,*cause consolidated with 99-219, *supra,*and 99-223 and 99-224, *infra.*

Cook, J.,

would hold this cause for the decision in 99-342, 99-348 and 99-618, *Holcomb v. State Farm Ins. Cos.,*Franklin App. No. 98AP-353.

Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21
                                                                      ----------

                                SUBSIDIARIES OF
                           TOMMY HILFIGER CORPORATION


                                               State or Other Jurisdiction
Name of Subsidiary                           of Incorporation or Organization
------------------                           --------------------------------

Tommy Hilfiger U.S.A., Inc.                          Delaware
Tommy Hilfiger Wholesale, Inc.                       California
Tomcan Investments Inc.                              Delaware
Tommy Hilfiger Canada Inc.                           Canada
Tommy Hilfiger Canada Retail Inc.                    Canada
Tommy Hilfiger Canada Sales Inc.                     Canada
Tommy Hilfiger Retail, Inc.                          Delaware
TH Retail, LLC                                       Delaware
Tommy Hilfiger Retail (UK) Company                   United Kingdom
Tommy Hilfiger Licensing, Inc.                       Delaware
Tommy Hilfiger Hungary Ltd.                          Hungary
Tommy Hilfiger 485 Fifth, Inc.                       Delaware
Tommy.com, Inc.                                      Delaware
Tommy Hilfiger E-Services, Inc.                      Delaware
Tommy Hilfiger (Eastern Hemisphere) Limited          British Virgin Islands
Tommy Hilfiger (India) Limited                       British Virgin Islands
New Bauhinia Limited                                 British Virgin Islands
Tommy Hilfiger (HK) Limited                          Hong Kong
Wellrose Limited                                     Hong Kong
THHK Womenswear Limited                              Hong Kong
THHK Jeanswear Limited                               Hong Kong
THHK Menswear Limited                                Hong Kong
THHK Junior Sportswear Limited                       Hong Kong
THHK Childrenswear Limited                           Hong Kong
Tommy.com Holdings Limited                           British Virgin Islands
### FOR PUBLICATION 

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT



#  J OHNATHAN A NDREW D OODY ,

Petitioner-Appellant, No. 06-17161 v. D.C. No.



#  D ORA B. S CHRIRO ; M EGAN S AVAGE ; CV-98-00528-EHC A TTORNEY G ENERAL OF THE ORDER S TATE OF A RIZONA ,

Respondents-Appellees. 

# 
Filed May 12, 2009

ORDER
KOZINSKI , Chief Judge: Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. Judges Hawkins and Silverman did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.

5901PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2009 Thomson Reuters/West.
NUMBER 13-12-00544-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

CHICORY COURT ALTA VISTA, 

L. P., ET AL., Appellants, 

v.

ODYSSEY RESIDENTIAL 

CONSTRUCTION GP II, LLC, 

ET AL., Appellees. 

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 24th District Court

of Victoria County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

ORDER

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Perkes

Order Per Curiam

This appeal was abated by this Court on September 21, 2012, and remanded to 

the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 
2

306a. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 306a(4),(5). On December 17, 2012, the appellants advised 

this Court that the parties were working to finalize a settlement agreement. On 

November 6, 2013, this Court granted the parties’ joint motion to continue the abatement 

until after mediation on November 14, 2013. Since then there has been no activity in this 

appeal.

The Court hereby orders the parties to file, within fourteen days of the date of this 

order, an advisory regarding the status of the appeal and, if applicable, a motion to 

reinstate the appeal or a motion to dismiss the appeal. 

Failure to respond to this order will result in reinstatement and dismissal of the 

appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b),(c).

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 

11th day of March, 2014.
REF ID:A488114 

lA\pproved for Release by NSA on 11-06-2013 pursuant to E. 0. 1352§ 
WASH 

Tt~E" 

H-ot./oL..v u 

-sh. ~o..XW~T.....,j_ 

/01c:..~F In\: A4~&_J_ji_. 

- io hM - l\ k.M> 

&t"--\\ 

+s~. 

So.......o.~ 

A64-..~ w~~ ---~r--~---~-t~--~~~~~-l-~-~-:--~--~--l-- r-4. A l"I :TOK.'{o 1 LA G- M "r 

-

WA5W 

+s:4-

AJ..6... ~ l.t,)~ 

\~ 

-41~~ .~·~ 

+4'/..,, ~ . p /\JZd' .J ' " , L'.tR.. 

-5 Jv ~ +-loi'-...~ ~ &.h <S~ ~J:i. 

-(~ 

~\I'-\\ 

+Is-~· 

"fNVe~ .... ~ A4li: 

--"'""~M:,_.-- -----

+1& ~ 

('~~ 

.)4-o N 0 \... u '- 1.J TO"-""(' 0 

- 10 Y'- ~ ~ Is:"~ ~o.J::t.. 
• 

• 

fST 

-5 

REF ID:A488114 

+1~ 

-15" 

-H~ 

-\(c, 

OS" 01' 0% 00 02.. ~\ \ls' ~ v \'°4' I~ 

\V 

I?> 

08'1\0l.. 

lb \\ (!)I 09 00 Ola, 1 

I~ lb 

\I 

\""' O't 

)...\ lb 1< 

\I '3V 

I~ og -·-"'•"'--- -~--...., ,.,. _ _.. 

01 Io oo o\ 01 '30 oi o~ oo oq ol. oo 

-:: og /03 2.0 = oi /oL "l..013972 0 

~ :#;;;~: ·~ o;g;~t~~ 
• 

• REF ID:A488114 

• 

w 5. ...... 6... ~ T~ '"W\ 

.SI~ ti-l.S"~c ' - ol I~ 00 01 !~ 00 oi lo 00 o/ o7 3o oca o~ 00 04 02. 00 ·~.......-... 

h>~~ ·1 ~ 1:00~·-· 

~,~~ .... 01 \~ ~o 01 \a :l.O 01 10 2.0 01 01 S"o Og' o~ ~c ~ 0)... 'l..O 

~itJ IN' 

·c.~IL«.. \'O 0[ I~ +s ~' I~ 45 b'1 /0 45 0/ 01 IS o~ 03 +s 6~ O'l. +s QJQ.~ 

~~fl,.~ll'- r.-...-.ll'4' L II 

~. ' 

~f'!lb.R~-~~..\· ,_}. 0\ \<( ~~ 01 \~ 41 01 lo ~ . 41 01 o~ 11 0'6' o~ +l o~ Cl.. +""' 

~~ ~ 

D{ \'l ~ o") l '1 ~ 01 II )..ll 01 08' S"b O'iS o"f ~ 0% c~ l.-o 

.j ..t•" " -~-M). .. 0\ ).\ 00 o/ lb oo 0.., I~ oo 01 10 ~t) C't5 OC:: oc: o~ o-r oo -~/lo. ~ ___ 

~~ ,, 

~ 

,/ 

~IS l.~l!~ \ / 

~~ A:t' 01 cD"' 3-0 / .. / 

or~-~ ~'f 

~ ----1---- 01 \0 ?.O \. 

~+.. 

~~ 

~r. ~. \° 

~~ oi \ l 00 . 

- 16-13672 QPO 

O'\ \ ").. I \
* 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

August 30, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-10723

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

NATHAN REYES

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:05-CR-4-ALL

Before WIENER, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Nathan Reyes has

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed an amended brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Reyes has filed a response in which

he claims, inter alia, that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move for

a judgment of acquittal. 
No. 05-10723

2

Our independent review ofthe record, counsel’s brief, and Reyes’s response

discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave

to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Jamie Lee Bledsoe, Appellant

No. 06-16-00044-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 71st District Court of 

Harrison County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 12-

0374X). Opinion delivered by Justice 

Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the judgment 

of the court below. Therefore, we modify the trial court’s judgment to reflect that Jamie Lee 

Bledsoe was convicted of the state jail felony of burglary of a building, but that the penalty for that 

offense is enhanced to the level of a second degree felony. As modified, the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

We note that the appellant, Jamie Lee Bledsoe, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED OCTOBER 14, 2016

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit 32.1

Certifications of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code

Pursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, each of the undersigned officers of LightPath Technologies, Inc. (the Company) does hereby certify, to the best of such officers knowledge, that:

1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable,
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 Company.



|                          |  |                                        
|------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|Dated: September 26, 2006 |  | /s/ KENNETH BRIZEL                     
|                          |  | Kenneth Brizel, Chief Executive Officer

The certifications set forth above are being furnished as an exhibit to the Report solely pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall
it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
1

 
     ***Section 1. Defined Terms***     Unless otherwise defined herein, terms defined in the Credit Agreements or in the SecurityAgreement and used herein have the meaning given to them in the Credit Agreements or the SecurityAgreement.     ***Section 2. Grant of Security Interest in Trademark Collateral***     Each Grantor, as collateral security for the full, prompt and complete payment and performancewhen due (whether at stated maturity, by acceleration or otherwise) of the Secured Obligations (asdefined in the Security Agreement) of such Grantor, hereby mortgages, pledges and hypothecates tothe Collateral Agent for the benefit of the Secured Parties (as defined in the Security Agreement),and grants to the Collateral Agent for the benefit of the Secured Parties a lien on and securityinterest in, all of its right, title and interest in, to and under the following Collateral of suchGrantor (the “*Trademark Collateral*”):     (a) all of its Trademarks and Trademark Licenses to which it is a party, including, withoutlimitation, those referred to on *Schedule I*hereto;     (b) all goodwill of the business connected with the use of, and symbolized by, each Trademark;and     (c) all Proceeds of the foregoing, including, without limitation, any claim by Grantor againstthird parties for past, present, future (i) infringement or dilution of any Trademark or Trademarklicensed under any Trademark License or (ii) injury to the goodwill associated with any Trademarkor any Trademark licensed under any Trademark License.     ***Section 3. Security Agreement***     The security interests granted pursuant to this Trademark Security Agreement is granted inconjunction with the security interest granted to the Collateral Agent pursuant to the SecurityAgreement and each Grantor hereby acknowledges and affirms that the rights and remedies of theCollateral Agent with respect to the security interest in the Trademark Collateral made and grantedhereby are more fully set forth in the Security Agreement, the terms and provisions of which areincorporated by reference herein as if fully set forth herein.[Signature Pages Follow]
2

 
     In witness whereof, each Grantor has caused this Trademark Security Agreement to beexecuted and delivered by its duly authorized offer as of the date first set forth above.      REVLON CONSUMER PRODUCTS CORPORATION,
POL-90 

Rev: " ADDRESS ONl..."t 

e REF ID:A36310. 

· DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE · 

AU communications respecting this application :Jbould dive the serial number., date of filing, and name of the applicant. THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS 

WASHINGTON 251 D. C. UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE 

WASHINGTON 

L 

Henry B. stautter 

lfa t1onal Seeuri t7 Agene1 waush1ngton 2.$1 n.a. 

Please find below a communication from the 

EXAMINER in charge of this application. 

f Applicant: 

Ser. No. 

Filed 

_J For 

PAPER No. 22 

William F. F~ied.m.an 

~~c~ -----------------'---------

Commissioner of Patents. 

Under ~orMer Section 4894 ot tbe Revi&ed 

Btatut&s. 3~ u.s.o. (1946) 37, the above-identified 

application will. become abandoned unlesa vesponse to 

the rejection of Feb~ua17 $. 1953 1s received on o~ 

before Februaey S, 19.$6 •. 

l!\pproved for Release by NSA on 07-23 2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

16-88457-2 · GPO