alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-21-00090-CV

COUNTY OF HIDALGO, TEXAS

v.

MARIA TAYLOR

On Appeal from the

332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. C-2763-19-F

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 21, 2022
EXHIBIT 12
 INTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED STOCK
DIVIDENDS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 and 2009
 (Dollars in thousands)
 September 30,
    
    
    September 30,2010
    
    
    2009(Unaudited)Earnings:Net Income
    
    $
    (57,708
    )
    
    $
    685,695Add:Provision for income taxes
    
    
    (23,731
    )
    
    
    374,491Fixed charges
    
    
    1,164,655
    
    
    
    1,052,619Less:Capitalized interest
    
    
    (4,669
    )
    
    
    (8,798
    )Earnings as adjusted (A)
    
    $
    1,078,547
    
    
    $
    2,104,007Fixed charges and preferred stock dividends:Preferred dividend requirements
    
    $
    440
    
    
    $
    3,262Ratio of income before provision for income taxes to net income
    
    
    141
    %
    
    
    155
    %Preferred dividend factor on pretax basis
    
    
    620
    
    
    
    5,056Fixed Charges:Interest expense
    
    
    1,157,533
    
    
    
    1,041,357Capitalized interest
    
    
    4,669
    
    
    
    8,798Interest factors of rents
    
    
    2,453
    
    
    
    2,464Fixed charges as adjusted (B)
    
    
    1,164,655
    
    
    
    1,052,619Fixed charges and preferred stock dividends (C)
    
    $
    1,165,275
    
    
    $
    1,057,675Ratio of earnings to fixed charges ((A) divided by (B))
    
    
    
    (a)
    
    
    2.00
xRatio of earnings to fixed charges and preferred stock dividends ((A) divided by (C))
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1.99
x
 
 (a)
    
    In the nine months ended September 30, 2010, earnings were insufficient to cover fixed
charges by $86.1 million due to non-cash impairment and lease related charges aggregating
$891.3 million.
*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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 00-20267

Summary Calendar

Civil Docket # H-99-CR-590-ALL

_______________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HAROLD LEE MILES, also known as Short Dog,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

_________________________________________________________________

March 29, 2001

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge:*

 Harold Lee Miles appeals his conviction for possession

with the intent to distribute crack cocaine in violation of 21

U.S.C. § 841. He argues that the evidence was insufficient to

establish his identity and his possession of the cocaine.

 Miles moved for a judgment of acquittal at the close of

the Government’s case in chief and at the close of evidence. Thus,

he properly preserved for appeal his argument that the evidence was

not sufficient to support his conviction. See United States v.
Moreno, 185 F.3d 465, 470-71 (5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 120 S.

Ct. 835 (2000). In deciding the sufficiency of the evidence, this

court determines whether, viewing the evidence and the inferences

that may be drawn from it in the light most favorable to the

verdict, a rational jury could have found the essential elements of

the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Charroux,

3 F.3d 827, 830-31 (5th Cir. 1993). 

 The jury was free to reject the alibi testimony offered by

Miles. See United States v. Freeman, 77 F.3d 812, 816 (5th Cir.

1996). Conversely, the jury was free to credit the identification

testimony of the officers because it was not incredible as a matter

of law. Id. Nor was it tentative or uncertain. Compare United

States v. Guerrero, 169 F.3d 933, 942 (5th Cir. 1999). Although

Miles suggests that his possession of the cocaine was based solely

on his presence in the area and his association with gang members,

the jury could rely on the police officer’s testimony that he saw

Miles throw down an object to establish the possession element of

the offense. See United States v. Skipper, 74 F.3d 608, 611 (5th

Cir. 1996). The judgment of the district is AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consentto the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-147347) pertaining to the Abraxis BioScience, Inc. 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, the American BioScience, Inc. Restricted Stock Unit Plan I and the American BioScience,Inc. Restricted Stock Unit Plan II and the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-160061) and related Prospectus pertaining to the registration of debt securities; common stock; preferred stock; warrants to purchase any of the other securitiesthat may be sold under the aforementioned prospectus; rights to purchase debt securities, common stock or preferred stock; and units consisting of one or more of these classes of securities, in one or more transactions; of Abraxis BioScience, Inc.,(formerly known as New Abraxis, Inc.) of our reports dated March 12, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Abraxis BioScience, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Abraxis BioScience,Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2009. 

/s/    Ernst & Young LLP 

Los Angeles, California 

March 12, 2010
Alfredo CISNEROS, petitioner, v. J. SOTO, Warden.

No. 13-6492.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
#### TAYLOR v. TOLMAN.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 11, 1913.)

Action by Catherine Taylor against Daniel H. Tolman.

No opinion. Application denied, with $10 costs. Order signed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

v. ) No. 2:14 CR 60

)

NYEGA SHAQOI HOST. )

O R D E R

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge

(DE # 47), to which the parties have waived any objections (id. at 3), the Magistrate Judge’s

findings and recommendations are now ADOPTED. Defendant Nyega Shaqoi Host is

ADJUDGED to have committed each of the violations of his supervised release as

described in the August 16, 2016 Petition. (DE # 31.) Defendant’s term of supervised release

is REVOKED and he is hereby committed to the United States Bureau of Prisons to serve 5

months of additional imprisonment. Upon his release from the Bureau of Prisons,

defendant shall be discharged from any further term of supervision.

Additionally, defendant has filed a motion regarding credit for time already served.

(DE # 45.) The motion is GRANTED in part to the extent it requests a recommendation that

defendant receive credit for time served. The motion is otherwise DENIED. Accordingly,

the court recommends to the Bureau of Prisons that defendant be granted credit for time

served on this supervised release revocation matter.

SO ORDERED.

Date: February 2, 2017

s/James T. Moody

JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7745

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

KEVIN TYRONE BALDWIN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior

District Judge. (CR-90-238-A, CA-96-1642-A)

Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 13, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin Tryone Baldwin, Appellant Pro Se. William Neil Hammerstrom,

Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Kevin Tyrone Baldwin seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A.§ 2255 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Baldwin, Nos. CR-90-238-A;

CA-96-1642-A (E.D. Va. Oct. 14, 1997). 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.

DISMISSED
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 Wound Management Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Lutz, Jr., Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.






Date: August 12, 2013/S/ Robert Lutz, Jr.Robert Lutz, Jr.,Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1780 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Cyclanilide Technical. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 21, 2005 

Mr. HULSHOF introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Cyclanilide Technical. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CYCLANILIDE TECHNICAL. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.05.50 1-(2,4-Dichlorophenylaminocarbonyl)cyclopropanecarboxylic acid 

(cyclanilide) (CAS No. 

113136–77–9) (provided for 

in subheading 2924.29.47) .. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 
2 

•HR 1780 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) No. 1:15-cr-00042-TLS-SLC

)

CHRISTIAN J. SMITH also known as )

Christian Smith, )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge

Susan Collins, on September 21, 2016, with the written consents of Defendant, counsel for

Defendant, and counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by Defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney

and of counsel for Defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charges against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that Defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses,
and his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that Defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and is

not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that Defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for Defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept Defendant’s plea of guilty and that Defendant

be adjudged guilty of the offenses charged in Counts 2, 3, and 5 of the Indictment, and have

sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Findings and

Recommendation be accepted and Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings

and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 21st day of September 2016.

/s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins,

United States Magistrate Judge

2
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**CREATIVECOMPUTER APPLICATIONS, INC.**

 

**Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,As adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Inconnection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for theperiod ended May 31, 2004 (the “Report”) by Creative Computer Applications,Inc. (“Registrant”), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that to theirknowledge:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

 

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant as of and forthe periods presented in the Report.

 

 

Date: July 15, 2004

 

 
| /S/ Anahita Villafane                                      |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Anahita Villafane, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |

 

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Creative Computer Applications, Inc. and will be furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1891 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1891

        To suspend temporarily the duty on 4-Chlorobenzaldehyde.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2005

 Mr. Cleaver introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To suspend temporarily the duty on 4-Chlorobenzaldehyde.

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

SECTION 1. 4-CHLOROBENZALDEHYDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.05.85       4-                 Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Chlorobenzaldehyd                                                  31/2008
                         e (CAS No. 104-88-
                         1) (provided for
                         in subheading
                         2913.00.40)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

CHARLOTTE DIVISION

Edward Paul Wohlleber,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

Biomet, Inc., and John Does 1-10,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 3:14-CV-00564

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STAY 

PENDING TRANSFER TO MDL AND 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

ANSWER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Joint Motion of the Parties (Doc. No. 4)

requesting a stay of all proceedings in this matter pending the transfer of this action to the 

multidistrict litigation In re: Biomet M2a Magnum Hip Implant Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 

2391, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana (“MDL No. 2391”) 

and further to extend Defendant Biomet, Inc.’s time to answer the Plaintiff Edward Paul 

Wohlleber’s Complaint until five (5) days after the action has been transferred to MDL No. 

2391. This Court has reviewed the motion and the argument of the Parties, and for good cause

shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Joint Motion of the Parties is GRANTED and that 

this proceeding is STAYED pending its transfer to MDL No. 2391 in the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Indiana. Further, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant 

Biomet, Inc.’s time to answer the Plaintiff’s Complaint is hereby EXTENDED until five (5) 

days after this action has been transferred to MDL No. 2391.
2

SO ORDERED.

Signed: October 21, 2014
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.78

                    [Spanish Broadcasting System, inc. Logo]

October 27, 2003

Raul Alarcon, Jr.
12 Indian Creek Road
Miami Beach, FL 33154

Dear Raul Alarcon, Jr.:

Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Spanish Broadcasting System, Inc.
1999 Stock Option Plan (the "Plan"), you have been granted an Nonqualified Stock
Option, to purchase 100,000 shares (the "Option") of Class A common stock as
outlined below.

             Granted To:   Raul Alarcon, Jr.

           Granted Date:   October 25, 2003

         Option Granted:   100,000

Option Price per Share: $8.69              Total Cost to Exercise:   $869,000.00

        Expiration Date:     October 25, 2013, unless terminated earlier.

       Vesting Schedule:   100% immediately as follows:

        Transferability:    Not transferable except in accordance with the Plan.

                                               Spanish Broadcasting System, Inc.

                                               By: /s/ Joseph A. Garcia
                                                   ---------------------------

By my signature below, I hereby acknowledge receipt of this Option granted on
the date shown above, which has been issued to me under the terms and conditions
of the Plan. I further acknowledge receipt of a copy of the Plan and agree to
conform to all of the terms and conditions of the Option and the Plan.

Signature:  /s/ Raul Alarcon, Jr.                   Date:   10/27/03
           --------------------------                       ----------
                 Raul Alarcon, Jr.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

HOBBS ARCHITECTURAL FOUNTAINS, INC., a foreign corporation,

Appellant,

v.

STELLAR BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC d/b/a CRITICAL BUILD, a 

Florida Limited Liability Company,

Appellee.

No. 4D16-3973

[November 16, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Carol-Lisa Phillips, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE14010796 

(25).

Randall L. Leshin of Randall Leshin, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellant.

Kevin J. Taylor of Kevin J. Taylor, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, TAYLOR and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge Daimon Monroe Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2
10) 1947
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,223
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,621
<ALLOWANCES>                                       348
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,611
<PP&E>                                           5,508
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,551
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,442
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,059
<BONDS>                                            482
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        242
<COMMON>                                        42,133
<OTHER-SE>                                    (30,474)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,442
<SALES>                                         12,321
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,321
<CGS>                                            9,242
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,242
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   221
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  76
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,050
<INCOME-TAX>                                       240
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                810
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       810
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.035
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.031
        

</TABLE>