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

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 222

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 29, 1998

Received and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress, congratulating the former

International Support and Verification Commission of

the Organization of American States (OAS–CIAV) for

successfully aiding in the transition of Nicaragua from

a war-ridden state into a newly formed democracy and

providing continued support through the recently created

Technical Cooperation Mission (OAS–TCM) which is responsible for helping to stabilize Nicaraguan democracy

by supplementing institution building.

Whereas the Organization of American States International

Support and Verification Commission (OAS–CIAV) was

established August 7, 1989, for the purpose of overseeing

assisting in the repatriation, disarmament, resettlement,

and protection of human rights of the Nicaraguan resistance and their families;
2

HCON 222 RFS

Whereas the OAS–CIAV, successfully demobilized 22,500

members of the Nicaraguan resistance and distributed

food and humanitarian assistance to more than 119,000

repatriated Nicaraguans prior to July 1991;

Whereas the OAS–CIAV successfully investigated and documented more than 1,800 human rights violations, including numerous murders and presented these cases to Nicaraguan authorities, following and advocating justice in

each case;

Whereas the OAS–CIAV helped demobilize rearmed contras

and Sandinistas, as well as apolitical criminal groups,

and recently brokered and mediated the successful May

1997 negotiations between the Government of Nicaragua

and the largest rearmed group;

Whereas the OAS–CIAV created 86 peace commissions and

has provided assistance and extensive training in human

rights and alternative dispute resolution for their members, who are currently mediating conflicts, including kidnaping and demobilization of rearmed groups, in every

municipality of the zones of conflict;

Whereas the OAS–CIAV successfully provided critically needed infrastructure and humanitarian assistance including

aid for Nicaraguan schools, roads, and health clinics; and

Whereas a new Organization of American States Technical

Cooperation Mission (OAS–TCM) has been created to expand upon the mission of the OAS–CIAV by providing

institution building resources in municipal government

development, social work, and civic education in the

twelve most conflictive municipalities in Nicaragua: Now,

therefore, be it
3

HCON 222 RFS

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress—

3 (1) commends and congratulates Santiago Mur4 ray, the first OAS–CIAV Director, and Sergio

5 Caramagna, the current director of the OAS–TCM,

6 and all members of the OAS–CIAV and OAS–TCM

7 team for their tireless defense of human rights, pro8 motion of peaceful conflict resolution, and contribu9 tion to the development of freedom and democracy

10 in Nicaragua; and

11 (2) expresses its support for the continuation of

12 the role of the OAS–TCM in Nicaragua.

Passed the House of Representatives April 28, 1998.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
* 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. 97-41194 Conference Calendar

JOE REEVES, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus FRANK NOVAK; J. REYNAUD; R. LAPOINTE, Captain; RAMSEY II UNIT, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. G-96-CV-358

- - - - - - - - - - June 17, 1998 Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Joe Reeves, Texas prisoner #591205, appeals from the dismissal of his prisoner civil rights action as frivolous. Reeves contends that the defendants deprived him of due process during prison disciplinary proceedings and that the defendants retaliated against him for using prison grievance procedures and for his success in previous litigation. Reeves fails to brief whether the district court erred byNo. 97-41194 -2- holding his due process claim barred because he has not shown that the result of his disciplinary hearing has been invalidated. He therefore has failed to brief the proper issue for appeal regarding his due process claim. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Reeves cannot demonstrate plain error regarding his retaliation contention, which he raises for the first time on appeal. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n , 79 F.3d 1415, 1428 (5th Cir. 1996)(en banc). Reeves’s allegations do not give rise to any inference of retaliation; his retaliation contention is frivolous. See Whittington v. Lynaugh , 842 F.2d 818, 819-20 (5th Cir. 1988). Reeves’s appeal is without arguable merit and therefore is frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). We previously dismissed an appeal by Reeves as frivolous. Reeves v. Novak , No. 96-41021 (5th Cir. Feb. 24, 1997) (unpublished). The district court’s dismissal of the present case and our dismissal of Reeves’s appeal constitute strikes two and three against Reeves for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). Because Reeves has three strikes, he may not bring a civil action or appeal as a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). APPEAL DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. SANCTION IMPOSED UNDERNo. 97-41194 -3- 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
#### Daniel LOPEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GARCIA APARTMENTS, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company and Arcadio Castillo, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-55541

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 20, 2017 * San Francisco, California

Filed January 10, 2018

Dennis J. Price, II, Esquire, Mr., Russell Clive Handy, Esquire, Mark D. Potter, Esquire, Potter Handy LLP, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Adolfo Bojalil Garber, Esquire, Adolfo B Garber Attorney at Law, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: TROTT, McKEOWN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App, P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

We affirm for the reasons provided by the district court in its “Order Re Attorneys’ Fees on Remand,” dated April 19, 2017.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Dou 

.;14.4;-`1 1- ■,•" 4;1 

gave conflicting stories about the reason he was out. A search of the area 

where Mikolajczyk originally spotted appellant revealed a screwdriver set 

with one bit removed. The bit, along with the driver, was on the curb. 

When Mikolajczyk asked appellant what he was doing with the tools, 

appellant shrugged his head, lowered it, and said, "I don't know," but did 

not deny possession of the set. From this evidence, a rational trier of fact 

could reasonably infer that appellant committed the charged offense. See 

NRS 205.080; Palmer v. State, 112 Nev. 763, 768-69, 920 P.2d 112, 115 

(1996) (discussing actual and constructive possession); Glispey v. Sheriff, 

89 Nev. 221, 223-24, 510 P.2d 623, 624 (1973); cf. Buchanan v. State, 119 

Nev. 201, 217, 69 P.3d 694, 705 (2003) (circumstantial evidence alone may 

sustain a conviction). Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the juvenile court AFFIRMED. 

Gibbons 

Saitta 

cc: Hon. William 0. Voy, District Judge, Family Court Division 

Clark County Public Defender 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney/Juvenile Division 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2
(logo)Rialto 

         CAPITAL

 

**2017 AnnualStatement of Servicer Compliance (Item 1123)**

 

 

Poolingand Servicing Agreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as ofNovember 1, 2014 by and among J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage SecuritiesCorp., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer,Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation as Certificate Administrator, Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation as Trustee and Pentalpha Surveillance LLC as Senior Trust Advisorrelating to the JPMBB Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-C25, CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-C25  **(JPMBB 2014-C25)**

 

 

Theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, asspecial servicer (the “Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1.       Allservicing activities and performance of such servicing activities under thePooling and Servicing Agreement are performed on behalf of the SpecialServicer.

 

2.       Areview of the servicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer forthe period of January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”) inaccordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under mysupervision.

 

3.       Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the terms of the Pooling and ServicingAgreement, in all material respects for the Reporting Period and if there hasbeen a failure to fulfill any such obligations in any material respect, eachfailure and the nature and status thereof has been specifically identifiedherein.

 

 

Certifiedby: /s/ AdamSinger                                                Date: March1, 2018

AdamSinger, Managing Director
Exhibit








EXHIBIT 10.22


UGI CORPORATION
SUMMARY OF DIRECTOR COMPENSATION


The table below shows the components of director compensation effective October 1, 2017.  A director who is an officer or employee of the Registrant or its subsidiaries is not compensated for service on the Board of Directors or on any Committee of the Board.  




CASH        EQUITY
COMPONENT        COMPONENT (1)(2) 


Annual Retainer for Non-Employee        $80,000        3,000 Stock Units
Directors                             9,000 Stock Options
                                
                                
Annual Retainer for            $250,000        5,100 Stock Units
Independent Chairman                        15,400 Stock Options


Additional Annual Retainer for         $10,000
Audit Committee Members
(other than the Chairperson)            


Additional Annual Retainer for         $20,000
the Audit Committee Chairperson        


Additional Annual Retainer for         $15,000
the Compensation and Management 
Development Committee Chairperson        


Additional Annual Retainer for         $10,000
the Corporate Governance Committee 
Chairperson    


Additional Annual Retainer for the Safety,    $10,000
Environmental and Regulatory Compliance
Committee Chairperson            




		
	(1)
	Stock Units and Stock Options are granted under the UGI Corporation 2013 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan.




		
	(2)
	Stock Units and Stock Options to be awarded in January 2017.
# Official Journal C 318/25 S

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 318 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6325 September 2020 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 318

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6325 September 2020

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2020/C 318/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2020 to 31 August 2020(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 1 |
| 2020/C 318/02 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2020 to 31 August 2020(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC) | 9 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2020/C 318/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2020 to 31 August 2020(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

1

2020/C 318/02

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2020 to 31 August 2020(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

9

---

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

EN
dg_Ex10_1



		

			Exhibit 10.1

		





		
			Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation
		

		
			(effective February 3, 2018)
		

		
			 
		

		
			We do not compensate for Board service any director who also serves as our employee. We will reimburse directors for certain fees and expenses incurred in connection with continuing education seminars and for travel and related expenses related to Dollar General business.  
		

		
			 
		

		
			Each non-employee director will receive payment (prorated as applicable) for a fiscal year, in quarterly installments, of the following cash compensation, as applicable: 
		

		
			 
		

			
	
			
				 ·
			

			
	
			
			$95,000 annual retainer for service as a Board member; 




			
	
			
				 ·
			

			
	
			
			$25,000 annual retainer for service as chairman of the Audit Committee; 




			
	
			
				 ·
			

			
	
			
			$20,000 annual retainer for service as chairman of the Compensation Committee; and 




			
	
			
				 ·
			

			
	
			
			$17,500 annual retainer for service as chairman of the Nominating & Governance Committee.




		
			 
		

		
			The Chairman of the Board will receive an annual Chairman retainer delivered on the first trading day of the fiscal year in the form of restricted stock units payable in shares of our common stock (“RSUs”) under our Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, which are scheduled to vest as to 100% of the award on the first anniversary of the grant date, subject to certain accelerated vesting conditions, and have an estimated value of $200,000.
		

		
			 
		

		
			In addition, we grant annually to those non-employee directors who are elected or re-elected at each applicable shareholders’ meeting an equity award under our Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Incentive Plan with an estimated value of $150,000 on the grant date. This entire value consists of RSUs. The RSUs will vest as to 100% of the award on the first anniversary of the grant date, subject to certain accelerated vesting conditions. Directors may elect to defer receipt of shares underlying the RSUs. They may also elect to defer up to 100% of cash fees earned for Board service under the Non-Employee Director Deferred Compensation Plan filed as Exhibit 10.6 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2014. Any new director appointed after the annual shareholders’ meeting but before February 1 of a given year, will receive a full equity award no later than the first regularly scheduled Compensation Committee meeting following the date on which he or she is appointed. Any new director appointed on or after February 1 of a given year but before the next annual shareholders’ meeting shall be eligible to receive the next regularly scheduled annual award.
AMENDMENT


TO


HANCOCK
JAFFE LABORATORIES, INC. 


2016
OMNIBUS INCENTIVE PLAN


 


In
accordance with those certain resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors and stockholders of Hancock Jaffe Laboratories, Inc.,
a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), the 2016 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) of
the Company is hereby amended as follows:


 


1.
Section 4.1 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to increase the number of shares reserved for issuance
under the Plan as follows:


 





“4.1.
Authorized Number of Shares. Subject to adjustment under Section 15, the aggregate number of Shares that may be initially
issued pursuant to the Plan is 5,000,000. The total number of Shares described in the preceding sentence shall be available for
issuance under Incentive Stock Options. Shares issued under the Plan may consist in whole or in part of authorized but unissued
Shares, treasury Shares or Shares purchased on the open market or otherwise. No later than the end of the Transition Period, the
maximum number of Shares for each type of Other Share-based Award, and the maximum amount of cash for any cash-based Award, intended
to qualify as “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) granted to any Grantee in any specified period
shall be established by the Company and approved by the Stockholders.”


 


2.
Unless otherwise expressly provided for in this Amendment to the Plan (the “Amendment”), all capitalized words,
phrases, or defined terms used in this Amendment will have the same meaning ascribed to them in the Plan.


 


3.
Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment, there have been no other changes or modifications to the Plan, and the plan remains
otherwise unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


4.
This Amendment shall be effective as of December __, 2017.


 


I
hereby certify that the Plan was duly amended and such Amendment has been duly approved by the Board of Directors of the Company
as of December __, 2017 and such Amendment has been duly approved by the stockholders of the Company as of December __, 2017.


 


[Remainder
of Page Intentionally Left Blank; Signature Page to Follow]


 




    	 	 



     


    

 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this Amendment to be executed effective as of the date set forth above.


 


	 	HANCOCK JAFFE LABORATORIES, INC., a

                                              Delaware corporation

	 	 	                       
	 	By: 	 
	 	Name: 	 
	 	Title:	 







 


Signature
Page to Amendment to the Plan
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND> 
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL POSITION, INCOME AND CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>    1000
       
<S>                                     <C>

<PERIOD TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  JAN-2-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                      JUL-04-1998
<CASH>                                                     59
<SECURITIES>                                                0<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                         357,313
<ALLOWANCES>                                                0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                                 0<F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            0<F1>
<PP&E>                                                      0<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                              0<F1>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        358,079
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       0<F1>
<BONDS>                                               343,780
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0<F1>
<PREFERRED>                                                 0<F1>
<COMMON>                                                    1<F1>
<OTHER-SE>                                              5,205
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          358,079
<SALES>                                                     0<F1>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       17,380
<CGS>                                                       0<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               0<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           66
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0<F1>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     17,228
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            86
<INCOME-TAX>                                               31
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        55
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0<F1>
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0<F1>
<CHANGES>                                                   0<F1>
<NET-INCOME>                                               55
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0<F1>
<FN>
(1)  Not applicable

</FN>
Exhibit 32


Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter year ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report") by Nevstar Gaming and
Entertainment, Inc. the undersigned hereby certifies that:

       1.    The Report complies in all material respects with the
             requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 Registrant.


                                        /s/ William O. Fleischman
                                        ___________________
                                        Chief Executive Officer and
                                        Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Joe GUZMAN, also known as Mike S. Aguirre, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11228 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 19, 2017

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S, Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jerry Van Beard, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Joe Guzman, Pro Se

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Joe Guzman has appealed the within-Guideline sentence for his conviction of possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance *837containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) & (b)(1)(B). Guzman has filed a motion for summary disposition. He asserts that his sole argument on appeal is foreclosed by precedent of this court, yet he seeks to preserve the issue for possible review by the United- States Supreme Court. According to Guzman, the applicable drug quantity Guideline in his case, U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, gave rise to a substantively unreasonable sentence insofar as its treatment of methamphetamine offenses “does not reflect the Sentencing Commission’s institutional expertise or its empirical analysis.”

Guzman is correct .that his argument is foreclosed. We have held that *Kimbrough v. United States, 552*U.S. 85, 109-10, 128 S.Ct. 558, 169 L.Ed.2d 481 (2007), does not disturb the presumption of reasonableness for Guidelines sentences even if the appropriate Guideline is not empirically based. See *United States v. Duarte,*569 F.3d 528, 530-31 (5th Cir. 2009); *United States v. Mondragon-Santiago,*564 F.3d 357, 366-67 (5th Cir. 2009). Because Guzman’s argument is foreclosed, his motion for summary disposition is GRANTED. The district court’s judgment 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.