alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
eworld_ex103.htm


EXHIBIT 10.3


 


SUMMARY OF ORAL AGREEMENT WITH OXYGEN AMERICA


 


The Company has an oral agreement with Oxygen America, Inc. to manufacture O2 Cell Product for the Company. Oxygen America, Inc. owns the formulations for the product. Oxygen America, Inc. manufactures the products and packs it with E-World USA designed packaging under an oral agreement with the Company. The Company is authorized by to sell the product worldwide under the E-World brand name with infringing any rights of Oxygen America, Inc.


 


There is no formal agreement on all the payment and purchase terms. We basically agree to purchase from them. Each payment and pricing is determined when we make an order from them.
ROBERT DARREN WINSLOW,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

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. 1D14-4747

_____________________________/

Opinion filed January 6, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Nassau County.

Robert M. Foster, Judge.

William J. Sheppard, Elizabeth L. White, Matthew R. Kachergus and Bryan E. 

DeMaggio, of Sheppard, White, Kachergus & DeMaggio, P.A., Jacksonville, for 

Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Anne C. Conley, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, C.J., WOLF and ROBERTS, JJ., CONCUR.
#### Marta Ortiz GOMEZ, a/k/a Carmelina Coc Yat, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 17-1624

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 19, 2017

Decided: January 8, 2018

Daniel Christmann, CHRISTMANNLE-GAL, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Peti*792tioner. Chad A. Readier, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Stephen J. Flynn, Assistant Director, Annette M. Wietecha, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Marta Ortiz Gomez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of her requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Ortiz Gomez’s merits hearing and all supporting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, *see*8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision, *see INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. *In re Ortiz Gomez*(B.I.A. Apr. 14, 2017). 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.

*PETITION DENIED*
No. 11-1514.

#### Fox *v.*Good Samaritan Hospital, L. P., et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         909,065
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,472
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               938,164
<PP&E>                                      13,262,642
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,755,581
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,445,225
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          464,293
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,980,932
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,445,225
<SALES>                                      1,280,814
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,380,698
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  931,328
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                449,370
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            449,370
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   449,370
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    10.95
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    10.95
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



         In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of China  Direct  Trading
Corporation  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending March 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Howard  Ullman,  Chief  Executive/Financial  Officer  of the  Company,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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.


/s/    Howard Ullman
Howard Ullman
CEO, President and Chairman
(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)


May 13, 2005


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
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.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

Reference is hereby made to thatcertain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 1, 2014, by andamong WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master

Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS,LLC, as Special Servicer, PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Trust Advisor, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, as TaxAdministrator and as Custodian, and WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, asTrustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series2014-C24 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein nototherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activitiesof the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through December31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per theAgreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of itsobligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President 

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### FRY, L. v. FRY, D.

1645 WDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/12/2017

2011-1815-CrVTL (Armstrong)

Affirmed
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from SEC
Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.


</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         965,509
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,199,923
<ALLOWANCES>                                   167,040
<INVENTORY>                                  1,456,842
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,558,589
<PP&E>                                       2,244,565
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,422,165
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,388,830
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          802,364
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       507,235
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,020,919
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,388,830
<SALES>                                      5,831,603
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,886,120
<CGS>                                        2,761,611
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,791,611
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,217,905
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,223
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                900,381
<INCOME-TAX>                                   378,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            521,781
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   521,781
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .52


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edmundo RODRIGUEZ, a.k.a. Blacky, a.k.a. Armando Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-50050

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 13, 2018 *

Filed February 16, 2018

Reema M. El-Amamy, L. Ashley Aull, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Edmundo Rodriguez, Pro Se

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Edmundo Rodriguez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 60-month sentence for distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(viii). Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Rodriguez’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Rodriguez has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No answering brief has been filed.

Rodriguez waived his right to appeal his conviction, with the exception of an appeal based on a claim that his plea was involuntary. He also waived the right to appeal most aspects of his sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to the voluntariness of Rodriguez’s plea or any aspects of the sentence that fall outside the scope of the waiver. We therefore affirm as to those issues. We dismiss the remainder of the appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. *See United States v. Watson,*582 F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).

To the extent that Rodriguez seeks to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we decline to address this issue on direct appeal. *See United States v. Rahman,*642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011).

In conjunction with his pro se supplemental brief, Rodriguez filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis. A review of the district court docket reflects that the district court found defendant financially eligible for appointed counsel. Appellant’s in forma pauperis status continues in this court. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). Appellant’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is therefore unnecessary.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 28, 2018.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D18-692

Lower Tribunal No. 18-3252

________________



### Gordon Hales

, Appellant,

vs.



### The State of Florida

, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Mark

Blumstein

, Judge.

Gordon Hales, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Magaly Rodriguez, Assistant

Attorney General

, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SALTER and LINDSEY, JJ.

ROTHENBERG, C.J.Gordon Hales appeals the trial court’s order issued on March 2, 2018

denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus relief. Because Hales’ petition is an

attack upon his conviction for sexual battery upon a child and the life sentence

imposed on April 27, 2000 in Broward County case number 95-3149-CF-10A,

which was affirmed on direct appeal, see Hales v. State

, 792 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 4th

DCA 2001), the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court was without jurisdiction to rule

on the petition. Thus, the trial court should have dismissed Hales’ petition without

prejudice to allow him to file an appropriate motion or petition in the Seventeenth

Judicial Circuit. See Hales v. State

, 957 So. 2d 699, 699-70 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)

(affirming the dismissal of Hales’ petition for writ of habeas corpus as the MiamiDade Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to review the legality of Hales’ conviction

entered in another county, without prejudice to allow Hales to file an appropriate

motion in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit); Calloway v. State

, 699 So. 2d 849, 850

(Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (concluding that a circuit court has no jurisdiction to review

the legality of a conviction and sentence imposed in another circuit court).

We, therefore, reverse the order denying Hales’ petition with instructions to

the trial court to dismiss the petition without prejudice to allow Hales to file his

petition in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

2A N Y P O S T

- O P I N I O N M O T I O N M U S T B E F I L E D W I T H I N S E V E N

D A Y S

. A R E S P O N S E T O T H E P O S T

- O P I N I O N M O T I O N M A Y B E

F I L E D W I T H I N F I V E D A Y S T H E R E A F T E R

.

3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
          MCDERMOTT INCORPORATED'S DECEMBER 31, 1996 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS
          QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                      1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          18,603
<SECURITIES>                                       260
<RECEIVABLES>                                  207,848
<ALLOWANCES>                                    41,931
<INVENTORY>                                    352,691
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               957,685
<PP&E>                                         596,725
<DEPRECIATION>                                 354,329
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,790,166
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          846,418
<BONDS>                                        388,586
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                4
<PREFERRED>                                    172,183
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     387,354
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,790,166
<SALES>                                      1,360,801
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,360,801
<CGS>                                        1,379,543
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,379,543
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,152
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (52,416)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (11,060)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (41,356)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (41,256)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
IV

House Calendar No. 68

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 98

[Report No. 105–200]

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the SAFE KIDS Buckle

Up Car Seat Safety Check.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 12, 1997

Mrs. MORELLA (for herself and Mr. HOYER) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation

and Infrastructure

JULY 24, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the SAFE

KIDS Buckle Up Car Seat Safety Check.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS.

4 The National SAFE KIDS Campaign (in this resolu5 tion referred to as the ‘‘sponsor’’) shall be permitted to

6 sponsor a public event, the SAFE KIDS Buckle Up Car
2

•HCON 98 RH

1 Seat Safety Check, on the Capitol grounds on August 27

2 and 28, 1997, or on such other dates as the Speaker of

3 the House of Representatives and the President pro tem4 pore of the Senate may jointly designate.

5 SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—The event authorized to be con7 ducted under section 1 shall be free of admission charge

8 to the public and arranged not to interfere with the needs

9 of Congress, under conditions to be prescribed by the Ar10 chitect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board.

11 (b) EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES.—The sponsor shall

12 assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities

13 incident to all activities associated with the event.

14 SEC. 3. EVENT PREPARATIONS.

15 (a) STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.—Subject to the

16 approval of the Architect of the Capitol, the sponsor may

17 erect upon the Capitol grounds such stage, sound amplifi18 cation devices, and other related structures and equip19 ment, and may take such other actions, as may be re20 quired for the event authorized to be conducted under sec21 tion 1.

22 (b) ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—The Architect of

23 the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board may make such

24 additional arrangements as may be required to carry out

25 the event.

House Calendar No. 68

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 98

[Report No. 105–200]

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the

SAFE KIDS Buckle Up Car Seat Safety Check.

JULY 24, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Equicap, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Jason
      Lu, Chief Executive Officer and David Ming He, Chief Financial Officer, each
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





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





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





/s/
                Jason LuJason
                LuChief
                Executive OfficerPrincipal
                Executive OfficerMay
                8, 2008/s/
                David Ming HeDavid
                Ming HeChief
                Financial OfficerPrincipal
                Financial OfficerMay
                8, 2008
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 128091 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 128091 

 COA: 255217 
 Wayne CC: 98-007768-01 

MALCOLM RIDGEWAY,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 16, 2004 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

d1024 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 31, 2005 

Clerk