alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Kelvin Keon EPPS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3442

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 23, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 10.12b**

**RETENTION NOTICE**

**Under GlobalSantaFe Retention Program**

Date of Notice: [DATE] 

To: [NAME OF EMPLOYEE] 

Thepurpose of this Retention Notice is to inform you that, subject to your satisfaction of the requirements set forth below, you have been selected to receive a Retention Benefit under the GlobalSantaFe Retention Program as amended and restatedeffective December 20, 2005 (the “Retention Program”). 

In order to receive the Retention Benefit, you must remain employedby GlobalSantaFe Corporation or one of its Affiliates, as defined in the Retention Program, until your Retention Date, unless otherwise provided in the Retention Program. Your Retention Date for this purpose is [RETENTION DATE]. 

If you remain employed until your Retention Date and otherwise satisfy the terms and conditions of the Retention Program for a full Retention Benefitpayment, the amount of the Retention Benefit will be $            . 

Further details and requirements related to the Retention Benefit are set forth in the Retention Program, which is attached to and incorporated into this Retention Notice. 

If you have any questions, please contact GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Director, Compensation & International Benefits (telephone281-925-6000). 

Thank you for your continued service. 

 

Attachment: Retention Program Document
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT OF ACCOUNTANTS



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-40039, 333-40033, and 333-40035) of Pegasus
Systems, Inc. of our report dated February 2, 1999 appearing in Pegasus Systems
Inc.'s 1998 Annual Report to Stockholders which is incorporated by reference
into Pegasus Systems, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1998. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our
report on the Financial Statement Schedule, which appears on page S-1 of such
Annual Report on Form 10-K.



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Dallas, Texas
March 30, 1999
---

|CERTIFICATION OF                                         
|---------------------------------------------------------
|CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL
      OFFICER
|PURSUANT TO                                              
|18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,                                  
|AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                                   
|SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002            

I, Vernon Samaroo, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Southridge Enterprises Inc. (the Company), hereby 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:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company, for
      the fiscal quarter ended February 28, 2006, and to which this
      certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies
      with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
      Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                             

| | By:    | /s/
      Vernon Samaroo         
| | ------ | ---------------------------------
| | Name:  | VERNON SAMAROO                   
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and Chief
| |        | Financial Officer                
| | Date:  | April 19, 2006                   

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-QSB to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-QSB), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 00-4473

JERRY ROGER MCMILLAN,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.

Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge.

(CR-88-179-P)

Submitted: November 30, 2000

Decided: December 27, 2000

Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part by unpublished

per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Mark P. Foster, Jr., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Brian L.

Whisler, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Jerry Roger McMillan appeals the district court’s judgment imposing a twenty-four month sentence for his violation of the terms of his

supervised release. McMillan suggests that the district court erroneously concluded that it lacked the discretion to impose a sentence

concurrent with McMillan’s pending term of imprisonment for his

state conviction. See USSG § 7B1.3(f), p.s. Although § 7B1.3(f) dictates that any term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of

supervised release be consecutive to any sentence the defendant is

serving, the Chapter 7 policy statements are not binding on the district

court. See United States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638, 641-42 (4th Cir.

1995). As a result, contrary to the district court’s statements at sentencing, the court was not bound to impose a consecutive sentence,

but could have in its discretion ordered a concurrent sentence under

the appropriate circumstances. See Koon v. United States, 518 U.S.

81, 92-95 (1996). The district court’s failure to recognize its own

power to depart downward renders the error reviewable on appeal.

See United States v. Bayerle, 898 F.2d 28, 31 (4th Cir. 1990). 

Accordingly, we vacate McMillan’s sentence only and remand for

reconsideration of the sentence in light of the district court’s discretion and the factors governing the possibility of a downward departure. See Koon, 518 U.S. at 95. The district court’s judgment is

affirmed in all other respects. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process. 

AFFIRMED IN PART AND VACATED

AND REMANDED IN PART

2 UNITED STATES v. MCMILLAN
Exhibit 10.16



 




EXHIBIT 10.16




AMENDMENT TO

STRATOS LIGHTWAVE, INC.
SEVERANCE PLAN



     The Stratos Lightwave, Inc. Severance Plan (the “Plan”) is amended in the
following respects, effective as of July 1, 2003:



	 	1.	 	Section 2(d)(iii) of the Plan is amended to read as follows:




		
	 	             (iii) The consummation of a merger or consolidation of the
Company with any other corporation, other than a merger or
consolidation which would result in the Company’s voting securities
outstanding immediately prior thereto continuing to represent (either
by remaining outstanding or by being converted into voting securities
of the surviving entity or its parent) at least sixty percent (60%) of
the total voting power represented by the Company’s voting securities
or such surviving entity or its parent outstanding immediately after
such merger or consolidation; or




	 	2.	 	the following new Section 3(e) is added immediately after
Section 3(d):




		
	 	             (e) Restricted to Employees Employed At Time of Change of
Control. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, an Eligible
Employee shall not be eligible for any benefits hereunder with respect
to a Change of Control unless he or she was an employee of the Company
immediately prior to the Change of Control.
Cheryl D. PATTERSON, Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., Appellee.

No. 3D17-2632

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 29, 2019.

Catherine A. Riggins, for appellant.

McGuire Woods LLP, and Sara F. Holladay-Tobias, Emily Y. Rottmann, and C. H. Houston III (Jacksonville), for appellee.

Before LOGUE, SCALES, and GORDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Carlos Ramon SANTIAGO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-391

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 3, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# **EXHIBIT 32.2**

# ** **

**CERTIFICATION**

** **

# **Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

**(Subsection (a)and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)**

** **

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), theundersigned officer of Vornado Realty Trust, sole general partner of VornadoRealty L.P. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge,that:

 

The Annual Reporton Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003**(the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   March 12, 2004 | /s/ Joseph  Macnow |                                                                                           |
|-----------------------|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | Name:              | Joseph  Macnow                                                                                 |
|                  | Title:             | Chief  Financial Officer of Vornado Realty Trust,  sole General Partner of Vornado Realty L.P. |
|                       |                    |                                                                                                |  |

 

1

----
Jason Matthew ROHRER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1707

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 4, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 19 (Thursday, January 30, 2025)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Pages 8479-8480]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-02041]



                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 19 / Thursday, January 30, 2025 / 
Presidential Documents

[[Page 8479]]

                Memorandum of January 20, 2025

                
Putting People Over Fish: Stopping Radical 
                Environ mentalism To Provide Water to Southern 
                California

                Memorandum for the Secretary of Commerce [and] the 
                Secretary of the Interior

                I hereby direct the Secretary of Commerce and Secretary 
                of the Interior, in consultation with the heads of 
                other departments and agencies of the United States as 
                necessary, to immediately restart the work from my 
                first Administration by the National Marine Fisheries 
                Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of 
                Reclamation, and other agencies to route more water 
                from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to other parts of 
                the state for use by the people there who desperately 
                need a reliable water supply.

                During my first term, the State of California, at the 
                direction of its Governor, filed a lawsuit to stop my 
                Administration from implementing improvements to 
                California's water infrastructure. My Administration's 
                plan would have allowed enormous amounts of water to 
                flow from the snow melt and rainwater in rivers in 
                Northern California to beneficial use in the Central 
                Valley and Southern California. This catastrophic halt 
                was allegedly in protection of the Delta smelt and 
                other species of fish. Today, this enormous water 
                supply flows wastefully into the Pacific Ocean.

                The recent deadly and historically destructive 
                wildfires in Southern California underscore why the 
                State of California needs a reliable water supply and 
                sound vegetation management practices in order to 
                provide water desperately needed there, and why this 
                plan must immediately be reimplemented.

[[Page 8480]]

                Within 90 days of the date of this memorandum, the 
                Secretary of Commerce and Secretary of the Interior 
                shall report to me regarding the progress made in 
                implementing the policies in this memorandum and 
                provide any recommendations regarding future 
                implementation.
                
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, January 20, 2025

[FR Doc. 2025-02041
Filed 1-29-25; 8:45 am]
Billing code 3395-F4-P
```
Jason PAYTON v. Adam THRASHER

1160599

Supreme Court of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
STATE of Louisiana v. Aja DOUCETTE

State of Louisiana v. Brandon A. Guidry

NO. 2018-KO-1304

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 3, 2019

Denied.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNIONAMERICA INSURANCE CO.,

LIMITED, Successor-ininterest to ST. PAUL

REINSURANCE,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

THE FORT MILLER GROUP, INC.,

THE FORT MILLER CO. and

BEECHE SYSTEMS CORP.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C05-1912 BZ

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE

SUPERSEDEAS BOND

Having received plaintiff Unionamerica’s request for an

order to show cause to increase the amount of defendants’

supersedeas bond, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants shall

show cause in writing by June 22, 2009, why they should not

be required to furnish further security as requested. 

Dated: June 9, 2009

 

 Bernard Zimmerman

 United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-01912-BZ Document 399 Filed 06/09/09 Page 1 of 1
HAWKINS ACCOUNTING
                                                     Certified Public Accountant
                                                   17412 Monterey Road, Ste. 200
                                                          Morgan Hill, CA  95037
                                  (408) 776 - 9455  Fax:  FAX:  (408) 776 - 8979



                      CONSENT OF THE INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT


As  the  independent auditor for Duro Enzyme Products, Inc., I hereby consent to
the  incorporation  by  reference  in  this  Form 10-KSB statement of my report,
relating  to  the  audited  financial statements dated December 23, 2002 for the
year  ended  September  30,  2002.



/s/  R.  Richard  Hawkins  II

December  23,  2002


<PAGE>
Matthew Gregory MANJA, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Danielle GOTTSCHLING, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1535

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 02, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Charter and Authorization of FCSIC Data Governance Body 

Pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Memorandum M-19-23 (July 10, 2019), I hereby 

establish the Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation Data Governance Body consisting of the 

persons holding the following positions: 

Chief Data Officer (Chair) 

Chief Operating Officer 

General Counsel 

Chief Financial Officer 

The FCSIC Data Governance Body will set and enforce priorities for managing data as a 

strategic asset to support FCSIC in meeting its mission, taking into account FCSIC's needs, 

structure and sources of data. 

The Data Governance Body will, as necessary and appropriate: 

• establish policy, procedures and roles for overseeing and coordinating data management 

policy; and 

• provide guidance on prioritizing data resource allocation to answer key questions and 

meet stakeholder needs. 

The Chief Data Officer is responsible for setting meetings and agendas for the Data Governance 

Body. 

Dated: September 11 , 2019 

hai 

Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation
# m8515.docx

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 30.6.2017 C(2017) 4664 final To the notifying parties: Subject : Case M.8515 - CPPIB / BPEA / NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1 )( b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 1 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area 2 Dear Sir or Madam, 1. On 06 June 2017 , the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which the undertakings Canada Pension Plan Investment Board ("CPPIB", Canada) and Baring Private Equity Asia ("BPEA", Singapore) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1 )( b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of the undertaking Nord Anglia Education, Inc ("Nord Anglia", Hong Kong) by way of purchase of shares. 3 2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: - CPPIB: professional investment management in real estate, public equities, private equities, infrastructure and fixed income instruments - BPEA: independent alternative asset management in real estate, private equities and growth capital - Nord Anglia: premium school operator active in China, Europe, the Middle East, the U.S. and Southeast Asia . 3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5 ( b ) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 . 4 4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1 )( b) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement . For the Commission (Signed) Johannes LAITENBERGER
Director - General
(1)
OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ( the ' Merger Regulation ' ). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( ' TFEU ' ) has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of ' Community ' by ' Union ' and ' common market ' by ' internal market ' . The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.
(2) OJ L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3 ( the ' EEA Agreement ' ).
(3) Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 188 , 14.06. 2017 , p. 23 .
(4)
OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 .
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 15

- 14008 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:14

- cv - 21778

- JAL

SOLOMON DAVID ROBERTS, Plaintiff

- Appellant,

versus ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA, LINDA S. KATZ, Defendant s - Appellees.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

________________________ ( April 28, 2016 ) Case: 15-14008 Date Filed: 04/28/2016 Page: 1 of 32 Before TJOFLAT, JILL PRYOR , and EDMONDSON , Circuit Judges.

PER CURIA M:

Solomon David Roberts, a Florida prisoner proceeding pro se , appeals the district court’s sua sponte dismissal

-- pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)

-- of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against Defendants Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General of the S tate of Florida, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney General. No reversible error has been shown; we affirm. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under section 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim, viewing the allegations in the
comp laint as true. Hughes v. Lott , 350 F.3d 1157, 1159

- 60 (11th Cir. 2003). We construe liberally pro se pleadings. Id . at 1160. Under section 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), the district court is authorized to dismiss a case filed by a prisoner proceeding in forma p auperis “at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.” (emphasis added). Briefly stated, Roberts complains that Katz misrepresented or withheld material facts during a po st

- conviction proceeding. Roberts contends that Katz’s conduct (1) rendered his guilty plea involuntary and (2) caused him to serve a

Case: 15-14008 Date Filed: 04/28/2016 Page: 2 of 33 sentence in excess of the maximum possible sentence for his offense of conviction. As relief, Roberts seeks monetary dam ages. “[W]hen a state prisoner seeks damages in a § 1983 suit, the district court must consider whether a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence.” Heck v. Humphrey , 114 S. Ct. 2364, 2372 ( 1994). If so, “the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated.” Id

. Although Roberts’s section 1983 complaint seeks only monetary damages, a judgment in Roberts’s favor would imply necessarily that his underlying conviction and sentence were invalid. Because Roberts has failed to demonstrate that his conviction and sentence have already been invalidated, the district court dismissed properly Roberts’s claim as not cogniz able under section 1983. See id. We reject Roberts’s contention that the district court’s dismissal constituted a violation of Roberts’s Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. See Garvie v. City of Fort Walton Beach , 366 F.3d 1186, 1190 (11th Cir. 2 004) (no Seventh Amendment violation when the court grants summary judgment based on a question of law).
AFFIRMED. Case: 15-14008 Date Filed: 04/28/2016 Page: 3 of 3