alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 10-Q/A
 (Amendment No. 1)
 (Mark One)
 þ
    
    QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008
 o
    
    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the transition period from  to
 Commission file number 333-84730
 LEASE EQUITY APPRECIATION FUND I, L.P.
  Delaware
    
    68-0492247(State or other jurisdiction of 
incorporation or organization)
    
    (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
 
 
 þ o
  Large accelerated filer o
Accelerated filer o
Non-accelerated filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Smaller reporting company þ o þ




---



##### 



LEASE EQUITY APPRECIATION FUND I, L.P.
Quarterly Report on 10-Q/A
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008
Explanatory Note




---



##### 



ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES




---



##### 



PART II  OTHER INFORMATION
 ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description3.1
    
    
    Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership (1)3.2
    
    
    Certificate of Limited Partnership (2)4.1
    
    
    Forms of letters sent to limited partners confirming their investment (2)10.1
    
    
    Seventh Amendment to Secured Loan Agreement with WestLB AG, New York Branch, dated
June 1, 2008 (3)31.1
    
    
    Rule 13a-14(a)/Rule 15d-14(a) Certification of Chief Executive Officer.31.2
    
    
    Rule 13a-14(a)/Rule 15d-14(a) Certification of Chief Financial Officer.32.1
    
    
    Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code.32.2
    
    
    Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code.
 
 (1)
    
    Filed previously as Appendix A to our Post-Effective Amendment
No. 3 to our Registration Statement on Form S-1, filed on January 24, 2004.(2)
    
    Filed previously as an Exhibit to Amendment No. 1 to our
Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed on June 7, 2002.(3)
    
    Filed previously on August 14, 2008 as an exhibit to our
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 and by this
reference incorporated herein.




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  LEASE EQUITY APPRECIATION FUND I, L.P.
A Delaware Limited PartnershipBy:
    LEAF Financial Corporation, its General PartnerOctober 14, 2008
    /s/ Crit DeMentCRIT DEMENTChairman and Chief Executive OfficerOctober 14, 2008
    /s/ Robert K. MoskovitzROBERT K. MOSKOVITZChief Financial OfficerOctober 14, 2008
    /s/ Tonya L. ZweierTONYA L. ZWEIERChief Accounting Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ARSENIO MONTOYA TIONGCO,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 17

- 72896

Agency No. A037

- 373

- 734

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

S ubmitted October 15, 2019 **

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON , Circuit Judges

.

Arsenio Montoya Tiongco, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeal’s order denying his appeal from an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying cancellation of removal. We have

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law.

Santiago

- Rodriguez v. Holder , 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011) . We deny the

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for d ecision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

OCT 18 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 17

- 72896

petition for review.

The agency did not err in denying Montoya Tiongco’s motion to withdraw

his previous concession of removability, where he failed to demonstrate any

egregious circumstance that would warrant withdrawing his pleadings. See id. at

831

- 32 (describing egregious circumstances that, if present, justify relieving an

alien of his attorney’s admissions)

.

Accordingly, the agency did not err in sustaining the removability charge.

See Barragan

- Lopez v. Mukasey , 508 F.3d 899, 905 (9th Cir. 2007) ( because

petitioner’s admissions at pleadings stage constitute clear, convincing, and

unequivocal evidence of remov ability , the government met its evidentiary burden

of demonstrating removability ).

Montoya Tiong c o’s contention that the IJ erroneously relied on testimony at

the relief stage to establish the removability charge i s not supported by the record.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 64/2007

of 25 January 2007         

fixing the export refunds on cereal-based compound feedingstuffs

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 september 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The export refunds on the compound feedingstuffs covered by Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 and subject to Regulation (EC) No 1517/95 are hereby fixed as shown in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 26 January 2007.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 25 January 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

(2)OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 51.

----

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 25 January 2007 fixing the export refunds on cereal-based compound feedingstuffs

Product codes benefiting from export refund:

----
Jaguar Cars Limited EMISSION DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT No. J10002D0A Causal part name: FUEL PUMP AND SENDER UNIT GASKET Causal part number: C2S34902

Issued: 19 May 2010 Page 1 of 2 Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40. Part 85. Subpart T. §85.1903 - Emissions Defect Information Report

(c)(1) The manufacturers corporate name. Jaguar Cars Limited.

(c)(2) A description of the defect. Illumination of the check engine warning light causes drivers to return their X-type vehicles to a Jaguar dealer for service. Dealer technicians find an evaporative emissions leak. Replacement of the fuel pump / tank seal C2S34902 resolves the problem.

(c)(3) A description of each class or category of vehicles potentially affected by the defect including make, model, model year, and such other information as may be required to identify these vehicles. See table in section (c)(4)(i) below. (c)(4) For each class or category of vehicle or engine described in response to paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the following shall also be provided: (c)(4)(i) The number of vehicles or engines known or estimated to have the defectand an explanation of the means by which this number was determined.

MODEL YEAR MODEL TEST GROUP SALES DEFECTS 2004 X-TYPE 2.5; X-TYPE 3.0 4JCXV03.0DNG 24918 46 2005 X-TYPE 2.5; X-TYPE 3.0; SPORTWAGON 5JCXV03.0DNG 6069 2005 X-TYPE 3.0; SPORTWAGON 5JCXV03.0DNH 5214 23 2006 X-TYPE 3.0; SPORTWAGON 6JCXV03.0DNH 5991 9 2007 X-TYPE 3.0; SPORTWAGON 7JCXV03.0DNH 3018 4 2008 X-TYPE 3.0; SPORTWAGON 8JCXV03.0DNH 807 1 The above data was taken from Jaguar's warranty tracking report dated 2009 Q4.

(c)(4)(ii) The address of the plant at which the potentially defective vehicles or engines were produced. Jaguar Halewood Plant, Liverpool, England.Jaguar Cars Limited EMISSION DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT No. J10002D0A Causal part name: FUEL PUMP AND SENDER UNIT GASKET Causal part number: C2S34902

Issued: 19 May 2010 Page 2 of 2 (c)(5) An evaluation of the emissions impact of the defect and a description of any driveability problems which a defective vehicle might exhibit. A defective fuel tank module seal results in increased evaporative emissions. There is no adverse impact on driveab ility associated with this defect. A defective fuel tank module seal illuminates the M.I.L.

(c)(6) Available emissions data which relate to the defect. There is no data available quantifying the impact on emissions of a defective fuel tank module seal.

(c)(7) An indication of any an ticipated manufacturer follow-up. MIL illumination will prompt drivers to return the vehicle to a Jaguar dealer for rectification. Fuel tank module seals will be replaced as required.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00102-CV

LILY AVIATION, LLC AND RAFAEL 

C. PALMEIRO

APPELLANTS

V.

WELLS FARGO EQUIPMENT 

FINANCE, INC.

APPELLEE

------------

FROM THE 141ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

------------

We have considered appellants’ “Motion To Dismiss Appeal.” It is the 

court=s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the 

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Costs of the appeal shall be paid by appellants, for which let execution 

issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

PANEL: MEIER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J. 

DELIVERED: July 12, 2012
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

SHANE SHAW,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-2271

[October 25, 2018]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Dennis D. Bailey, 

Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 10-15069 CF10A, 11-7302 CF10A and 11-7595 

CF10A.

Shane Shaw, Blountstown, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

TAYLOR, LEVINE and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 32

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT



I, John C.K. Hui,  President and Chief Executive  Officer of  Vasomedical,  Inc.
(the "Company"),  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     (1)  the Annual  Report on Form  10-KSB of the  Company for the fiscal year
          ended  May  31,  2007,   (the   "Report")   fully  complies  with  the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Dated: August 23, 2007

                                           /s/ John C.K. Hui
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           John C.K. Hui
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer





I,  Tricia  Efstathiou,  Chief  Financial  Officer  of  Vasomedical,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     (1)  the Annual  Report on Form  10-KSB of the  Company for the fiscal year
          ended  May  31,  2007,   (the   "Report")   fully  complies  with  the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Dated: August 23, 2007

                                           /s/ Tricia Efstathiou
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Tricia Efstathiou
                                           Chief Financial Officer
GEORGIA PORTS AUTHORITY v. LAWYER.

A17A0230

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

August 6, 2019

Christopher Michael Carr, Samuel S. Olens, Kathleen M. Pacious, Loretta L. Pinkston-Pope, Atlanta, Jared Matthew Campbell, Victoria Anne Cuneo Powell, for Appellant.

Kathryn Hughes Pinckney, Brent J. Savage, Brent Jamieson Savage Jr., James Kyle Califf, Savannah, for Appellee.

Brown, Judge.

In *Ga. Ports Auth. v. Lawyer* , 304 Ga. 667, 821 S.E.2d 22 (2018) ( *Lawyer II* ), the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed Division 1 of this Court's opinion in *Ga. Ports Auth. v. Lawyer* , 342 Ga. App. 161, 803 S.E.2d 94 (2017) ( *Lawyer I* ). Accordingly, we vacate only Division 1 of our prior opinion, adopt the opinion of the Supreme Court of Georgia, and reverse the trial court's denial of the Georgia Ports Authority's motion to dismiss Lawyer's claim for damages in excess of $1 million. See *Lawyer II* , 304 Ga. at 682 (5), 821 S.E.2d 22.

*Judgment reversed.*

McFadden, P. J., and Coomer, J., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DAVID ZAITZEFF,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

CITY OF SEATTLE, a municipality;

DANIEL SATTERBERG, King County

Prosecutor, those in privity with him, in re

RCW 9.41.250 and Sea v Evans,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 16

- 35955

D.C. No. 2:16

- cv

- 00244

- BAT

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Brian Tsuchida , Magistrate Judge, Presiding **

Submitted November 15, 2017 * * *

Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

David Zaitzeff appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

* This disposition is not appro priate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28

U.S.C. § 636(c).

** * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

NOV 21 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 16

- 35955

for lack of standing his action alleging that Revised Washingto n Code section

9.41.250 and Seattle Municipal Code sections 12A.14.080 and.083 violate his First

and Second Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo. Wilson v. Kayo Oil Co. , 563 F.3d 979, 980 (9th Cir. 2009). We

affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Zaitzeff’s action because Zaitzeff

failed to allege facts sufficient to establish constitutional standing to bring a pre

enforcement challenge to a statute. See T homas v. Anchorage Equal Rights

Comm’n , 220 F.3d 1134, 1139 (9th Cir. 2000) ( setting forth factors to consider in

evaluating genuineness of a claimed threat of prosecution ); San Diego Cty. Gun

Rights Comm ’n v. Reno , 98 F.3d 1121, 1126 (9th Cir. 1996) (plaintiff must show a

“ genuine threat of imminent prosecution” (citation and quotation marks omitted) ) ;

see also Libertarian Party v. Bowen , 709 F.3d 867, 870 (9th Cir. 2013) (in First

Amendment context, courts consider “whether the prosecuting authorities have

communicated a specific warning or threat to initiate proceedings, and the history

of past prosecution or enforcement under the challenged statute”).

AFFIRMED.
a6622311_ex10n8.htm


 


Exhibit 10-N-8







Executive Compensation Recoupment Policy












On February 25, 2011, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors formally adopted an amended and restated policy of recoupment of compensation in certain circumstances.  The purpose of this policy is to help ensure executives act in the best interests of the Company.  The policy requires any Company officers to repay or return cash bonuses and/or equity awards in the event:  (i) the Company issues a material restatement of its financial statements where the restatement was caused by such officer’s intentional misconduct; (ii) such officer was found to be in violation of non-compete provisions of any plan or agreement; or (iii) such officer has committed ethical or criminal violations.  The Committee will consider all relevant factors and exercise business judgment in determining any appropriate amounts to recoup up to 100% of compensation awarded.  The policy will apply to the Incentive Bonus Plan beginning with the 2010 performance period and equity awards beginning with grants made in 2011.
STATE of North Carolina v. Christopher B. SMITH

No. 119PA18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 9, 2019

Jason C. Yoder, Attorney at Law, for Smith, Christopher B.

Tiffany Y. Lucas, Assistant Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 16th of May 2018 by State of NC in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2019."
STATE v. Reginald Underwood FULLARD

309P15-7

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2019

Kimberly N. Callahan, Assistant Attorney General, For State of North Carolina.

Reginald Fullard, For Fullard, Reginald Underwood.

James R. O'Neill, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina.

*79The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th of May 2019 by Defendant for Objection Entry to Motion to Dismissed by Order of Court Conference of 9 May 2019:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2019."
STATE v. Jeffery Martaez SIMPKINS

188A19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 21, 2019

Kimberly P. Hoppin, Attorney at Law, For Simpkins, Jeffery Martaez Leroy.

Daniel O'Brien, Alexandra M. Hightower, Assistant Attorneys General, T. Lynn Clodfelter, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st of May 2019 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 21st of May 2019."
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5320 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5320

To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for 
     coverage under that Act of employees of States and political 
            subdivisions of States, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2006

 Mr. Andrews introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for 
     coverage under that Act of employees of States and political 
            subdivisions of States, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fairness for State and Local Workers 
Act''.

SEC. 2. COVERAGE OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES.

    Section 3(5) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 
U.S.C. 652(5)) is amended--
            (1) by inserting after ``employees,'' the following: 
        ``including a State or political subdivision of a State,''; and
            (2) by striking ``or any State or political subdivision of 
        a State''.
                                 <all>
```
Jonathan E. BRUNSON v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services, Inc., and The State of North Carolina

No. 44P19

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 9, 2019

Jonathan E. Brunson, For Brunson, Jonathan E.

Barry H. Bloch, Assistant Attorney General, for NC Department of Public Safety, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 28th of January 2019 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

*707"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2019."
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NOS. CAAP-23-0000362 and CAAP-23-0000424

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

BEVERLY GANNON; HALI IMAILE STORE, INC., dba HALI IMAILE GENERAL STORE and CELEBRATIONS CATERING; and MR. TUTTLE, LLC, dba GANNON'S, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. GREGORY ZAMORA and SEVEN AROMAZ, INC., dba TOTAL FOOD SOLUTIONS,

Defendants-Appellants

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT

(CIVIL NO. 2CCV-22-0000145)

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS APPEAL (By: Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, Wadsworth and Guidry, JJ.) Upon consideration of the November 6, 2023 Stipulations for Dismissal With Prejudice of All Claims and Parties (Stipulations for Dismissal ) respectively filed in CAAP-23- 0000362 and CAAP-23-0000424 by Defendants-Appellants Gregory Zamora and Seven Aromaz Inc. dba Total Food Solutions, the papers in support, and the record, it appears that: (1) the appeals inCAAP-23-0000362 and CAAP-23-0000424 are consolidated under CAAP23-0000424; (2) the appeal has been docketed; (3) the parties stipulate to dismiss the consolidated appeal and bear their own attorneys' fees and costs on appeal; (4) the stipulation is dated and signed by counsel for all parties appearing in the appeal; and (5) dismissal is authorized by Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 42(b).

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulation for Dismissal filed in case number CAAP-23-0000424 is approved and the consolidated appeal is dismissed. The parties shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs on appeal. Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-23-0000362 01-DEC-2023 07:58 AM Dkt. 49 OAWSTNOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Stipulation for Dismissal filed in case number CAAP-23-0000362 is dismissed as moot. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, December 1, 2023. /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Presiding Judge /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Associate Judge /s/ Kimberly T. Guidry Associate Judge

2
STATE v. Kenneth Calvin CHANDLER

189A19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 8, 2019

Katherine Jane Allen, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Chandler, Kenneth Calvin.

G. Glenn Gerding, Attorney at Law.

Jennifer T. Harrod, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Robert S. Banks, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*214The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 8th of July 2019 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of July 2019."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 1st day of August 2019 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.