alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### *In re*APPORTIONMENT OF WASHTENAW COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS—1968. PETITION OF SALLADE.

Counties — Board or Supervisors — Apportionment — Validity — Variances.

Plan for apportionment of Washtenaw County Board of Supervisors into 13 districts with a maximum population variance ratio 1:1.14 *held,*constitutional under record presented.

Reference for Points in Headnote

25 Am Jur 2d, Elections § 31.

Original statutory action in Court, of Appeals to review apportionment plan.

Submitted Division 2 July 16, 1968, at Lansing.

(Docket No. 5,758.)

Decided October 23, 1968.

Petition by George Wahr Sallade .for, statutory review of apportionment plan for the Washtenaw County Board of Supervisors.

Plan .declared valid.

*George Wahr Ballade, in propria*persona.,

*William F. Delhey,*Washtenaw County Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

Per Curiam.

On June 7, 1968, the Washtenaw county apportionment commission filed the apportionment plan contested in this action, pursuant to PA 1966, No 261, MCLA, §§46.401-46.415 (Stat Ann 1968 Cum Supp §§ 5.359[1] — 5.359[15]), with the Washtenaw county clerk. Thereafter, plaintiff filed a petition and a brief in support thereof with *705this Court for a review of the plan. Defendant filed a one-page answer, hut failed to brief the issues. The cause was submitted to the panel on July 16, 1968. The cause was reviewed on the pleadings and exhibits filed herein.

The apportionment plan provides for 13 supervisor districts. The largest is district No 8, with a population of 13,702, and the smallest is district No 1 with 12,013. All population figures are based on the 1960 Federal decennial census with appropriate corrections to meet the guideline set forth in MCLA, § 46.404 subd (g) (Stat Ann 1968 Cum Supp § 5.359 [4] subd [g]). The total county population under the plan is 167,461, with an average population of 12,881.6 per district. The maximum population variance ratio is 1:1.14. Under the plan, it takes the votes of electors in districts containing 52.09% of the population to elect a majority of the board of supervisors. The largest district is 6.37% above the average and the smallest 6.74% below the average.

A review of the plan filed and the challenges made to it does not disclose a violation of constitutional requirements for the apportionment of county supervisor districts. See: *Avery*v. *Midland County*(1968), 390 US 474 (88 S Ct 1114, 20 L Ed 2d 45); *Reynolds*v. *Sims*(1964), 377 US 533 (84 S Ct 1362, 12 L Ed 2d 506).

Plaintiff also attacks the plan under review on the basis of alleged violations of other statutory guidelines and grounds outside of the statute. We are not persuaded by plaintiff’s presentation that there is any merit in his arguments on the point so raised.

The relief sought in plaintiff’s petition is hereby denied.

Lbsinski, C. J., and J. H. Gtllis and Levin, JJ., concurred.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jaime LAZARO-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-40765 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed May 18, 2017

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jaime Lazaro-Garcia, Pro Se

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jaime Lazaro-Garcia has *354moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lazaro-Garcia has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47,5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *354the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Thadene MATTIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2603

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 12, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
|  | **ROSS  MILLER**

**Secretary  of State**

**204  North Carson Street, Ste 1 Carson City, Nevada 89701 -4299 (775) 684 5708**

**Website:  secretaryofstate.biz** | **Exhibit 3.1** |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|

 

**Certificate of Amendment**

(PURSUANTTO NRS 78.385 AND 78.390)

 

| **USE BLACK INK  ONLY - DO NOT HIGHLIGHT** | **ABOVE SPACE IS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY** |
|--------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|

**Certificate of Amendment toArticles of Incorporation****For Nevada Profit Corporations(Pursuant to NRS 78.385 and 78.390 - After Issuance of Stock)**

1.   Name of corporation:

2.   The articles have been amended as follows(provide article numbers, if available):

Section4.1 CAPITAL STOCK

This Corporation shall have the authority to issue anaggregate of Three Hundred Million (300,000,000) shares of common stock, parvalue $0.001 (hereinafter "Common Stock"), and Ten Million (10,000,000)shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001 (hereinafter, "PreferredStock"). Common Stock and Preferred Stock may be issued from time to timewithout action by the stockholders. Common Stock and Preferred Stock may beissued for such consideration as may be fixed from time to time by the Board ofDirectors.

3.   The vote by which the stockholders holdingshares in the corporation entitling them to exercise at least a majority of thevoting power, or such greater proportion of the voting power as may be required in the case of a vote by classes or series, or as may berequired by theprovisionsof the*****articles of incorporation have voted in favor ofthe amendment is:

| 4. Effective date of filing  (optional): |                                                             |
|------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                     | (must  not be later than 90 days after the certificate is filed) |

 

**5.  **Officer Signature **(Required):                     *****/s/ Mark R. Newburg***

 

*****If any proposed amendment would alter or change anypreference or any relative or other right given to any class or series ofoutstanding shares, then the amendment must be approved by the vote, inaddition to the affirmative vote otherwise required, of the holders of shares representing a majority of the voting power ofeach class or series affected by the amendment regardless of limitationsor restrictions on the voting power thereof.

**IMPORTANT:**Failure to include any of the above information and submit the properfees may

causethis filing to be rejected.

 
| *This form must be accompanied by appropriate fees.* | Nevada Secretary of State AM 78.385 Amend 2007 Revised on: 01/01/07 |
|------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
**Exhibit 32.1**
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934****AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**
     In connection with the quarterly report of Connetics Corporation (the “Registrant”) on Form10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas G. Wiggans, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant,certify, in accordance with Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:
     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
     *This certification accompanies the**Form 10-Q**to which it relates, is not deemed filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filingof the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whethermade before or after the date of the**Form 10-Q**), irrespective of any general incorporation languagecontained in such filing.*        Date: May 10, 2005 /s/ Thomas G. Wiggans   Thomas G. Wiggans   Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                      9
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                          1,106
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          2,509
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                    0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                       270
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          4,261
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            4,242
<LOANS>                                        28,958
<ALLOWANCE>                                       187
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 37,937
<DEPOSITS>                                     29,309
<SHORT-TERM>                                      800
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               291
<LONG-TERM>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                      7,537
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 37,937
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 1,165
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 159
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   69
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                1,393
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                691
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                708
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             685
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   448
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   268
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        268
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                      176
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.37
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   3.72
<LOANS-NON>                                       299
<LOANS-PAST>                                        0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    65
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  187
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       0
<RECOVERIES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 187
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                           187
        


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of drugstore.com, inc. (the “Company”)for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert A. Barton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

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

(2) The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been providedto drugstore.com, inc. and will be retained by drugstore.com, inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

March 15, 2007
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP,INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8, No. 333-83975) pertaining to the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and 1998 Stock Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-58174) pertaining to the 1998 Stock Plan and (Form S-8, No.333-85468) pertaining to the 1998 Stock Plan of drugstore.com of our report dated January 17, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of drugstore.com, inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the yearended December 29, 2002. 

 

/s/    ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

 

Seattle, Washington 

March 25, 2003
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin Sergio DeLeon GARZA, also known as Agustin S. Garza, also known as Agustin Garza, also known as Agustin DeLeon Garza, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-50846 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed June 8, 2017

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, Daphne Danille Newaz, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Donna F. Coltharp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Maureen Scott Franco, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Agustín Sergio DeLeon Garza, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Agustín Sergio DeLeon Garza appeals the within-guidelines life sentence imposed following his conviction of seven counts related to kidnaping, ransom, and money *263laundering. He contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than needed to achieve the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Because DeLeon Garza did not raise a substantive reasonableness objection in the district court, his arguments, as he concedes, are reviewed for plain error only, based on this court’s precedent. *See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago,*564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir. 2009); *United States v. Peltier,*505 F.3d 389, 391 (5th Cir. 2007). Nevertheless, DeLeon Garza argues that plain error review should not apply to preserve the issue for further review. To establish plain error, he must show that the district court committed a clear or obvious error that affected his substantial rights. *See Puckett v. United States,*556 U.S. 129, 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009). Even if he does so, we will correct the error only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the proceedings. *Id.*

DeLeon Garza has not shown error, plain or otherwise, in connection with his sentence. We presume that a within-guidelines sentence, such as DeLeon Garza’s, is reasonable. *See United States v. Jenkins,*712 F.3d 209, 214 (5th Cir. 2013). A defendant can rebut the presumption only if he shows that the district court ignored an important sentencing factor, afforded substantial weight to an irrelevant or inappropriate factor, or clearly erred in weighing the factors. *Id.*DeLeon Garza’s arguments do not make this showing. Rather, he has shown only a disagreement with the propriety of the sentence imposed, which does not suffice to show substantive unreasonableness. *See United States v. Ruiz,*621 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
#### New York Merchandise Company, Inc., Respondent, *v.*McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, Inc., Appellant, and Acme News Pictures, Inc., Impleaded Defendant, Respondent.

Submitted April 12, 1943;

decided April 22, 1943.

*764
      *Milton Kunen*and *Macdonald DeWitt*for motions.

*Chester Bordean*and *Neal M. Welch*opposed.

Motions granted and appeal dismissed, with costs, and ten dollars costs of motion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM WATERMARC
FOOD MANAGEMENT CO. FORM 10-Q FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF FISCAL 1998 AND IS 
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q REPORT.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1997
<CASH>                                          62,773
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  460,720
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    374,245
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,488,883
<PP&E>                                       5,333,528
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,880,771
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,464,410
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    329,540
<COMMON>                                       713,161
<OTHER-SE>                                   (666,879)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,880,771
<SALES>                                      9,450,564
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,450,564
<CGS>                                        2,884,301
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,766,301
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             152,835
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (427,541)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (427,541)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (427,541)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.24)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of MDU Communications International, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 23, 2003 andamended on March 16, 2004 (the “Report”), I, Sheldon Nelson, Chief ExecutiveOfficer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that, to my knowledge: (1) the Report fully complies with therequirements 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 allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to and will be retained by MDU Communications International, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
|                | /s/  SHELDON  NELSON                                                                              |   |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                | Sheldon  Nelson*Chief Executive Officer and  Chief Financial Officer*MDU Communications International, Inc. |
|                |                                                                                                        |
|                |                                                                                                        |
| March  16, 2004     |                                                                                                        |
| Totowa,  New Jersey |                                                                                                        |

 

1

----
EXHIBIT 10.72
 MOVE, INC.
NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
     Grant of Option
 Definitions




---



##### 



Vesting of Option
 Period of Option and Limitations on Right to Exercise
      - 2 -




---



##### 



Exercise of Option
 Beneficiary Designation
 Withholding
 - 3 -




---



##### 



Limitation of Rights
 Stock Reserve
 Restrictions on Transfer and Pledge
 Restrictions on Issuance of Shares
 Changes in Capital Structure
 - 4 -




---



##### 



Successors
 Severability
 Notice
 Arbitration
 Amendment and Modification
 Governing Law
  MOVE, INC.:
    
    OPTIONEE:By: /s/ James S. Caulfield

Name: James S. Caulfield
    
    /s/ Robert J. Krolik

Robert J. KrolikTitle: EVP, General Counsel
& Secretary
 - 5 -
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6584 

To restore the functions of the Office of Innovation of the Bureau of 

Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 4, 2023 

Mr. TIMMONS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To restore the functions of the Office of Innovation of the 

Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘Encouraging Innova5 tion and Protecting Consumers Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. RESTORING FUNCTIONS OF THE OFFICE OF INNO7 VATION. 

8 On the date that is 180 days after the date of the 

9 enactment of this Act— 

2 

•HR 6584 IH

1 (1) the Office of Competition and Innovation of 

2 the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (in 

3 this Act referred to as the ‘‘Bureau’’) shall termi4 nate; and 

5 (2) the Office of Innovation of the Bureau and 

6 the functions of such Office are restored or revived 

7 as if the Office described in paragraph (1) had not 

8 been established. 

9 SEC. 3. FUNCTIONS OF THE OFFICE OF INNOVATION. 

10 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Office of Innovation of the 

11 Bureau shall, not later than 180 days after the date of 

12 the enactment of this section reestablish— 

13 (1) the Compliance Assistance Sandbox Policy 

14 as established by the Bureau on September 10, 2019 

15 in chapter X of title 12 of the Code of Federal Reg16 ulations; and 

17 (2) the No Action Letter Policy, as established 

18 by the Bureau on September 10, 2019 in chapter X 

19 of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 

20 (b) TRIAL DISCLOSURE POLICY.—The Office of In21 novation of the Bureau shall continue implementing the 

22 Trial Disclosure Policy as established by the Bureau on 

23 September 10, 2019 in chapter X of title 12 of the Code 

24 of Federal Regulations. 

Æ