alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 10-6415.

#### Jermel Pope, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 988, 131 S. Ct. 429,

178 L. Ed. 2d 334,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8286.

October 18, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 370 Fed. Appx. 735.
Revisions to section I and II based on our discussion this afternoon

Lydia Wegman 

to: 

james_a._laity, dmancini 

06/01/2010 08:06 PM 

Cc: 

Karen Martin, Michael Stewart, John Hannon, Steven Silverman, Doug Johns, Tricia Crabtree, Lydia 

Wegman 

Show Details 

Jim and Dom, 

The attached document is a redline of all the changes to sections I and II, as well as some changes 

to the regulatory provisions. In addition to addressing the matters we discussed this afternoon, we

have made some changes to address issues we wanted to clarify. Thus, this is a redline to the 

version we sent you on May 4. The pages which contain changes responding to our afternoon 

discussion are on pages 44, 48,49, and 83. Please let us know if you have any questions. 

Thanks. 

Lydia 

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\tcrabtre\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web3534.htm 6/2/2010
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-11102

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

BONIFACIO LOPEZ-URBINA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:13-CR-84-1

Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Bonifacio LopezUrbina has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lopez-Urbina 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 

* 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 29, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-11102 Document: 00512751015 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
No. 13-11102

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.

2

 Case: 13-11102 Document: 00512751015 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 24(a)

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

     The undersigned as an officer and director of both Eagle-Picher Holdings,
Inc. and Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc., and as director of Eagle-Picher
Technologies, LLC, hereby consents to and appoints David G. Krall and John F.
Sullivan, and each of them, as his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents
with all power of substitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any
and all capacities, to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the 2001 fiscal
year of both Eagle-Picher Holdings, Inc. and Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.,
corporations organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and
the State of Ohio respectively, and of Eagle-Picher Technologies, LLC, a limited
liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Delaware, and any and all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all
exhibits thereto, and all documents in connection therewith, with the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them,
full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done in and about the same as fully to all intents
and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming
all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or either of them, or their or his
substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
thereof.

     In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has hereunto set his hand on this 13th
day of February, 2002.

/s/ JOEL P. WYLER
---------------------------------------------------------
Joel P. Wyler
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jorge Mateo, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 872]

*1366Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Bellini, J.), entered September 19, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of murder in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant was convicted following a jury trial of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25 [2]) for the shooting death of the victim. We reject defendant’s contention that County Court erred in admitting the out-of-court declaration of the victim identifying defendant as his assailant. The statement was made by the victim while he was “under the stress of the event” *(People v Vigliotti,*270 AD2d 904, 904 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 839, 970 [2000]) and at a time when he was so severely wounded that his “impending death could be readily inferred” *(People v Thanh Giapp,*273 AD2d 54, 55 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 872 [2000]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the court properly determined that an eyewitness who invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination was unavailable to testify (see *People v Snow,*298 AD2d 985 [2002], *lv denied*99 NY2d 564 [2002]). In addition, the court properly permitted the prosecutor to read the testimony of that eyewitness from the preliminary hearing into the record at trial, inasmuch as defendant had a fair opportunity to cross-examine him at the preliminary hearing (see *id.).*Finally, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct during his cross-examination of defendant, and, in any event, we conclude that defendant was not thereby deprived of a fair trial *(see People v Conway,*277 AD2d 1020 [2000], *lv denied*96 NY2d 782 [2001]). Present—Pine, J.P., Wisner, Kehoe, Gorski and Lawton, JJ.
Document Services supports sailors’ career advancement
 
  By Gina Napoli, Document Services
Exhibit 32.2

                            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 GiveMePower  Corporation  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending  December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jim
Bolokoski,  Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 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 and 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.

     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been provided to  GiveMePower  Corporation  and will be retained by  GiveMePower
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.

Date:  February 15, 2005                               By: /s/ JIM BOLOKOSKI
                                                           -----------------
                                                       Jim Bolokoski
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.3
 AMENDMENT #7 TO CONTRACT NO. 0652 BETWEEN
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH AND
AMERIGROUP GEORGIA MANAGED CARE COMPANY, INC.
  WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS, Section 32.0, Amendments in Writing,
 NOW THEREFORE,
 I.
    
    Upon receiving written notice from CMS indicating that agencys approval of
the revised capitation rates, the parties shall delete the current
Attachment H,Capitation Payment inits entirety and replace it with the new
Attachment H,Capitation Payment,contained at Exhibit 1 to this Amendment.II.
    
    DCH and Contractor agree that they have assumed an obligation to perform the
covenants, agreements, duties and obligations of the Contract, as modified and amended
herein, and agree to abide by all the provisions, terms and conditions contained in the
Contract as modified and amended.III.
    
    This Amendment shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto,
their heirs, representatives, successors and assigns. Whenever the provisions of this
Amendment and the Contract are in conflict, the provisions of this Amendment shall take
precedence and control.VI.
    
    It is understood by the Parties hereto that, if any part, term, or provision of
this Amendment or this entire Amendment is held to be illegal or in conflict with any
law of this State, then DCH, at its sole option, may enforce the remaining unaffected
portions or provisions of this




---



##### 



Amendment or of the Contract and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be
construed and enforced as if the Contract or Amendment did not contain the particular
part, term or provision held to be invalid.VII.
    
    This Amendment shall become effective as stated herein and shall remain effective for so
long as the Contract is in effect.VIII.
    
    This Amendment shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Georgia.IX.
    
    All other terms and conditions contained in the Contract and any amendment thereto, not
amended by this Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect.
  SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE




---



##### 



SIGNATURE PAGE
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH
 -s- Dr. Rhonda M. Meadows
    
    9/23/09
DateDr. Rhonda M. Meadows, M.DCommissioner
 AMERIGROUP GEORGIA MANAGED CARE COMPANY, INC.
 BY:
    

(ILLEGIBLE)
SIGNATURE
    
    09/02/09

Date
    
    [SEAL]-s- Tunde SotundePlease Print/Type Name HereChief Executive Officer
 AFFIX CORPORATE SEAL HERE(Corporations without a seal,
attach a Certificate of
Corporate Resolution)
 ATTEST:
    
    -s- Stanley F. Baldwin
**SIGNATUREVice President and Secretary

TITLE
 
 *
    
    Must be President, Vice President, CEO or Other Authorized Officer**
    
    Must be Corporate Secretary




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 1
 
  *****REDACTED*****
2017-0419.

#### Tucker v. Frary.

In Mandamus. On motion to dismiss. Motion granted. Cause dismissed.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Donnell, Kennedy, French, O’Neill, Fischer, and DeWine, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis,

 Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 27, 2010 

s0920 

Order 

 

September 27, 2010 

140367 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140367 

 COA: 293382 

Wayne CC: 02-010098-FC 

TIMOTHY L. BARNES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 23, 2009 

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).
EXHIBIT 10.27


                     FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         This First Amendment to Employment Agreement ("Agreement") is effective
as of  January 1, 1999 by and between Resource Bank ("Resource") and T. A.
Grell, Jr. ("Employee") (collectively the "Parties").

                                    RECITALS:

         1. The Parties have entered into an Employment Agreement dated January
1, 1999 ("Original Employment Agreement").

         2. The Parties desire to amend the Original Employment Agreement as set
forth herein.

                                    AGREEMENT

         In consideration of the premises and the mutual promises herein made,
it is hereby agreed that:

         1. Whenever the term "Resource" is used in Section 10 of the Original
Employment Agreement, such term shall mean Resource Bankshares Corporation.

         2. This Agreement may be signed in one or more counterparts, all of
which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

         3. Except as otherwise specifically set forth herein, the terms and
conditions of the Original Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this instrument on the
date written above.


         EMPLOYEE NAME                RESOURCE BANK

/s/ T. A. Grell, Jr.                  By       /s/ Lawrence N. Smith
------------------------                 ------------------------------
Signature                                      Lawrence N. Smith

T. A. Grell, Jr.                      Its:   Chief Executive Officer
--------------------------                  --------------------------
Printed Name

Date:                                 Date:
      --------------------                  --------------------------


                                       37
No. 10-6395.

#### Kenneth Alan Stradley, Petitioner v. Willie L. Eagleton, Warden.

562 U.S. 1047, 131 S. Ct. 603,

178 L. Ed. 2d 440,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8998.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 373 Fed. Appx. 361.
No. 09-11181.

#### Lawrence Kevin Billings, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

562 U.S. 866, 131 S. Ct. 154,

178 L. Ed. 2d 92,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6616.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.83

            Call Option Agreement-Participation Letter of Shanghai Perfect Media

                   ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTER FOR PARTICIPATION OF
                              CALL OPTION AGREEMENT

SHANGHAI FOCUS MEDIA ADVERTISEMENT CO., LTD., (registered address: Room
1003 F, No.1027, Changning Road, Changning District, Shanghai) and JIMMY WEI YU
(Identity Card Number: 310106731015081) (hereinafter the "PARTICIPATING
SHAREHOLDER"), and SHANGHAI PERFECT MEDIA ADVERTISING AGENCY CO., LTD.
(registered address: No. 4278 Zhennan Road, Shanghai) (hereinafter the
"NEW TARGET COMPANY"), as independent party, hereby agree to participate in the
Shareholders' Voting Rights Call Option Agreement among Focus Media Technology
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "FOCUS MEDIA TECHNOLOGY"), Shanghai Focus
Media Advertisement Co., Ltd. and other relevant parties (hereinafter the "CALL
OPTION AGREEMENT") dated March 28 2005. Participating Shareholder hereby grant
Focus Media Technology with an irrevocable equity Call Option (hereinafter "CALL
OPTION") in respect to 90% and 10% of the equity share of New Target Company
(hereinafter "NEWLY INCREASED EQUITY SHARE") respectively held by Participating
Shareholder. Once this Acknowledgement Letter is executed by Participating
Shareholder and New Target Company, New Target Company and the Newly Increased
Equity Share shall be deemed to be the "Target Company" and "Option Equity"
defined under the Call Option Agreement, and Participating Shareholder and New
Target Company shall be deemed to have made the same undertakings and warranties
related to New Target Company and Option Equity with those of the Shareholders
and Target Companies under the Call Option Agreement have made related to
"Target Company" and "Option Equity" (to the extent that is related and
applicable to Participating Shareholder and Participated Target Company), and
acknowledged and agreed to respectively perform the same obligations in the Call
Option Agreement (to the extent that is related and applicable to Participating
Shareholder and Participated Target Company).

<PAGE>

            Call Option Agreement-Participation Letter of Shanghai Perfect Media

                                [EXECUTION PAGE]

SHANGHAI FOCUS MEDIA ADVERISEMENT CO., LTD.
(Company chop)

Signature by:    /s/ Jason Nanchun Jiang
              -----------------------------
Name: Jason Nanchun Jiang
Position: Authorized Representative
Date: May 22, 2006

JIMMY WEI YU

Signature by:    /s/ Jason Nanchun Jiang
              -----------------------------
Date: May 22, 2006

SHANGHAI PERFECT MEDIA ADVERTISING AGENCY CO., LTD.
(Company chop)

Signature by:    /s/ Jason Nanchun Jiang
              -----------------------------
Name: Jason Nanchun Jiang
Position: Authorized Representative
Date: May 22, 2006

FOCUS MEDIA TECHNOLOGY (SHANGHAI) CO., LTD.
(Company chop)

Signature by:    /s/ Jason Nanchun Jiang
              -----------------------------
Name: Jason Nanchun Jiang
Position: Authorized Representative
Date: May 22, 2006
No. 10-5387.

#### William Staples, Petitioner v. Claude Chester, Warden.

562 U.S. 919, 131 S. Ct. 289,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7384.

178 L. Ed. 2d 189,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 370 Fed. Appx. 925.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001064049
<NAME> DIAMOND BRANDS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,317
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,303
<INVENTORY>                                     16,823
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,977
<PP&E>                                          37,803
<DEPRECIATION>                                  20,813
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,086
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,988
<BONDS>                                        227,233
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           43,232
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                   (202,879)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,086
<SALES>                                         23,282
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,282
<CGS>                                           15,107
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,107
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,331
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,088
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,244)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (426)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (818)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (818)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 10.5
 GOLDMAN SACHS CREDIT PARTNERS L.P.
85 Broad Street
New York, New York 10004
  
 
 AMERIGROUP Corporation Credit Facilities
  Borrower GSCP Wachovia Lenders Credit Agreement




---



##### 



Very truly yours,
GOLDMAN SACHS CREDIT PARTNERS L.P.By:Name:Title:




---



##### 



Agreed and Accepted,
as of the date first written above:WACHOVIA CAPITAL MARKETS, LLCBy:Name:Title:WACHOVIA BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONBy:Name:Title:




---



##### 



Agreed and Accepted,
as of the date first written above:AMERIGROUP CORPORATIONBy:Name:Title:PHP HOLDINGS, INC.By:Name:Title:
Exhibit
32.1
   
  THE
MONARCH CEMENT COMPANY
 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 The Monarch Cement Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted 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 results of operations of the
      Company.
   A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
The Monarch Cement Company and will be retained by The Monarch Cement Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
   
   Dated: 
May 11, 2010
  /s/ Walter H. Wulf,
Jr.
 Walter H. Wulf, Jr.
 President and Chairman of the
Board
No. 10-5927.

#### Kenyatta Ahmad Brown, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 941, 131 S. Ct. 360,

178 L. Ed. 2d 232,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7260.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 378 Fed. Appx. 373.