alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion filed June 13 , 201 3



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________ 

### No. 11

- 13

- 00030

- C R

__________ 

### DAVID LONGORIA GONZALES , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 266 th District Court

Erath County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No . CR13797

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N The jury convicted David Longoria Gonzales of the first

- degree felony of possession of a controlled substance. T he jury assessed his punishment at
confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice for a term of seventy years and imposed a fine of $ 10,0 00. W e dismiss the appeal.2 Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw in this appeal. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has provided A ppellant with a copy of th e brief and advised A ppellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. Court

- appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App . 2008); Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v.
State , 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); and Eaden v. State , 16 1 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.

— Eastland 2005, no pet.). Appellant has filed a pro se response to counsel’s motion to withdraw and supporting brief. In addressing an Anders brief and pro se response, a court of appeals may only determine (1) that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error or (2) that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so
that new couns el may be appointed to brief the issues. Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403 ; Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman , we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit and should be dismissed.
Schulman , 252 S.W.3d at 409. We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise A ppellant that he may file a petit ion for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review by that court. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 48.4 (“In criminal cases, the attorney representing the defendant on appeal shall, within five days after the opinion is hande d down, send his client a copy of the opinion and3 judgment, along with notification of the defendant’s right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review under Rule 68.”). Likewise, this court advises A ppellant that he may file a petition for discre tionary review pursuant to T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68. The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

June 13 , 2013 Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., McCall, J., and Willson, J.
DOW CONFIDENTIAL - Do not share without permission

To whom it may

concern, The User Manuals for the DJ I Inspire and Phantom are too large to upload onto the regulations.gov website. The links for each of the manuals can be found at: http://www.dji.com/product/inspire - 1/download http://www.dji.com/product/phantom - 3/download http://www.dji.com/product/phantom - 2 - vision - plus/download
```

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 GenoMed, Inc. ("the Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Dr. David Moskowitz,
Principal Accounting Officer, Chief Executive Officer and President, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 result of operations of
          the Company.

/s/ Dr. David Moskowitz
Dr. David Moskowitz
President/Chief Executive Officer/Chairman of the Board/Chief Accounting Officer

Dated: June 3, 2004
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         3,019
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 24,696
<ALLOWANCES>                                     414
<INVENTORY>                                    5,439
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              38,646
<PP&E>                                       215,125
<DEPRECIATION>                               125,858
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               128,127
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         26,434
<BONDS>                                       29,878
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                       8,762
<OTHER-SE>                                    46,914
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 128,127
<SALES>                                      224,866
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             224,866
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                205,570
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,903
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (1,703)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (226)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (1,477)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,477)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.17)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.17)<F1>

        

<FN>

(1) EPS-Primary and EPS-Diluted have been restated to reflect the application
    of Financial Accounting Standard No. 128, "Earnings Per Share."
</FN>




</TABLE>
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 March 31, 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  ̈
  Large accelerated filer oAccelerated filer oNon-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 March 31, 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)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.




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  LEASE EQUITY APPRECIATION FUND I, L.P.
A Delaware Limited Partnership
By: 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
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, John W. Jardine, certify that;

(1)         I have reviewed this report on Form10-QSB for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 of Nordic Nickel Ltd.;

(2)         Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

(3)         Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4)         The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a)         designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)         evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c)         disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5)         The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)         all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b)         any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.  

 

Date:     November 13, 2007
## Draft Proposal CB-18

This concept has been developed by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) as a possible code

change proposal to the Commercial provisions of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code

(IECC). Interested parties are asked to submit any and all comments on DOE's initial concepts and draft

code change proposals. For instructions on submitting comments, visit:

www.energycodes.gov/development/ commercial/codes/iecc/concepts/



## Opaque Doors (CB-18)

Objective: Clarify when doors are considered part of the opaque wall and subject to thermal

requirements for the wall, and when doors are fenestration and subject to those requirements.

Suggested Code Change Proposal

Renumber C402.2.7 and revise as follows:

C402.2.7 C402.3. 3 Opaque d Doors

. Opaque doors (doors that are at least 50% opaque in surface area

having less than 50% glass area ) shall meet the applicable require ments for doors as specified in Table

C402.2 and be considered part of the gross area of above-grade walls that are part of the building thermal

envelope. All other doors shall meet the provision s of Section C402.3.4 for vertical fenestration.

Reason: As currently defined, doors are considered fenestration regardless of the percentage of glazing

they contain. As such, users of the code would logically begin to address the requirements for doors in

the fenestration section of the code. Instead the provisions are located in the sections dealing with the

opaque assemblies, and by omission one can conclude from a review of this provision in the opaque

section of the code that any door with at least 50

‐ percent glass area must be fenestration. Relocation of

the door provisions to the fenestration section of the code is appropriate, and from there doors that are

opaque can be correctly referred back to the sections of the code addressing opaque assemblies and

components.

Cost Impact: There is no cost impact associated with this proposed change.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Geraldine Dudley, Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 241]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J.), rendered May 26, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth and seventh degrees, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 3 to 6 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in precluding defendant from cross-examining a police chemist regarding the police laboratory’s receipt, at the time in question, of only a provisional accreditation pursuant to the State program for ac*331creditation of forensic laboratories established by article 49-B of the Executive Law. Defendant’s offer of proof failed to establish the relevance of this line of inquiry. The chemist’s testimony established that he performed the standard tests for controlled substances, while being eminently qualified to do so, and the court afforded defendant a full opportunity to cross-examine the chemist as to his qualifications and the reliability of his tests.

Defendant was in possession of extensive information concerning the accreditation of the laboratory, and was not entitled to disclosure, pursuant to *Brady v Maryland*(373 US 83), of certain additional, coded information on the same subject. There is no indication that anything in this material could have been exculpatory. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 32**
**CERTIFICATION**
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned hereby certifiesin his capacity as an officer of Monarch Community Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) that the QuarterlyReport of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition of the Company at the end of such period and results of operations of the Company forsuch period.     Date: May 10, 2005 By: /s/ Donald L. Denney            Donald L. Denney   President and Chief Executive Officer   (Principal Executive Officer)     Date: May 10, 2005 And: /s/ William C. Kurtz            William C. Kurtz   Senior Vice President and Treasurer   (Principal Financial Officer)
exv10w73






Exhibit 10.73




TENNECO INC. THREE YEAR

LONG TERM PERFORMANCE UNIT AWARD AGREEMENT

(2008-2010 Performance Period)




December [__], 2009




Dear Participant:




          Pursuant to the provisions of the Tenneco Inc. (the “Company”) 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan,
you were granted an Award (the “Award”) of Long Term Performance Units on [                    ], [___] pursuant
to a Long Term Performance Unit Award Agreement (the “Original Award Agreement”). The Award covers
the three calendar years 2008, 2009 and 2010 (the “Performance Period”). Capitalized terms not
otherwise defined in this letter shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Original Award
Agreement.




          Pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Original Award Agreement, the Committee may amend the Award at
any time in its sole discretion to exercise downward discretion in the amount payable under the
Award if the Committee determines that the payout yielded or that would be yielded by this Award
for the Performance Period does not accurately reflect the Company’s performance for the
Performance Period. The purpose of this letter is to so amend the
Award.




          This letter amends the Award so that, for purposes of calculating the amount (if any) payable
to you in respect of the Award, the term “Three Year Annualized TSR” shall mean the lesser of (i)
the Three Year Annualized TSR calculated pursuant to the definition thereof in the Original Award
Agreement and (ii) the Three Year Annualized TSR calculated as follows:





“Three Year Annualized TSR” means the amount (expressed as a percentage) equal to the
Company’s compound annualized total shareholder return over the Performance Period;
provided, that, the calculation shall be made using an ending price for the Company’s common
stock equal to the Ending Stock Price and using a starting price for the Company’s common
stock equal to the Beginning Stock Price.




“Beginning Stock Price” means the Average Price calculated immediately following the
Company’s release of its annual earnings for calendar year 2007.




“Ending Stock Price” means the Average Price calculated immediately following the Company’s
release of its annual earnings for the last calendar year in the Performance Period.



          Except as expressly set forth herein, all terms of the Original Award Agreement remain in full
force and effect and are not modified by this letter.




TENNECO INC.
#### GREENVILLE BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY v. T. H. NICHOLS and G. V. SMITH.

(Filed 14 March, 1928.)

Appeal by defendant, G. Y. Smith, from *Lyon, Special Judge,*at November Term, 1927, of Pitt.

Motion to set aside judgment rendered by a justice of the peace on a promissory note for $50, executed by T. H. Nichols and endorsed by G. Y. Smith, on the ground that no copy of the summons was left with the appealing defendant. Motion overruled, and the defendant, G. V. Smith, appeals.

*W. A. Darden for plaintiff.*

*J. Con Lanier for defendant, G. V. Smith.*

Per Curiam.

The defendant appeals, relying on *Pass v. Elias,*192 N. C., 497; 135 S. E., 291. But the defect in the service of summons was cured by a general appearance. *Motor Co. v. Reaves,*184 N. C., 260, 114 S. E., 175; *Wooten v. Cunningham,*171 N. C., 123, 88 S. E., 1; *Currie v. Mining Co.,*157 N. C., 209, 72 S. E., 980; *Scott v. Life*Asso., 137 N. C., 515, 50 S. E., 221.

Affirmed.
Docket No: FAA - 2015 - 0491 Dir ID: 2015 - NM - 019 -AD
The ESTATE OF Robert Eugene TIPTON, Jr., BY AND THROUGH His Ancillary Administrator, Deborah Dunklin TIPTON and Deborah Dunklin Tipton, Individually v. DELTA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY, INC., Michael Qubein, Individually and as an Agent for Delta Sigma Phi Fraternity, Marshall Jefferson, Individually and as an Agent for Delta Sigma Phi Fraternity, High Point University, Nido Qubein, Individually and as President of High Point University

No. 144P19

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2019

Jay H. Ferguson, Durham, Donald H. Beskind, Raleigh, Attorneys at Law, For Tipton, Robert Eugene (Jr.) (The Estate of), et al.

Michael C. Osborne, Attorney at Law

Clint S. Morse, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, For Delta Sigma Phi Fraternity, Inc.

John E. Spainhour, Attorney at Law, Asheville, For Qubein, Michael

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 23rd of April 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:

*77"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2019."

Davis, J. recused
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

(as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)



I, Patrick T. Mooney, as Chief Executive Officer of Aphton Corporation (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 my knowledge:



|1. | the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2004 (the Report), filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 Company.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                                                
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------
|Date: March 16, 2005 |  | /s/ PATRICK T. MOONEY, M.D.                    
|                     |  | Patrick T. Mooney, M.D. Chief Executive Officer
<page>  EXHIBIT 32.02

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Morgan Stanley Charter
Campbell L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christian
Angstadt, Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management
Corporation, the general partner of the Partnership, 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:
(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 Partnership.









By:  /s/Christian Angstadt

Name:	   Christian Angstadt
Title:  Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management Corporation,
        the general partner of the Partnership

Date:	   May 15, 2008



? 6 ?


? 6 ?

- 5 -
MORGAN STANLEY CHARTER CAMPBELL L.P.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED)





? 84 ?

- 37 -

- 85 -