alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Notice: This opin ion is subject to form al revision before publication in the Atl antic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal

errors so that correc tions m ay be made before the boun d volum es go to press.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF AP P EALS

No. 1 5- BG- 8

IN RE: KENRICK A. SMALL, Res po nd en t. Ba r Reg is tra tio n No. 5 02 46 3 BDN: 3 12 -1 4

BEFORE: Bec kwi th , Ass oc ia te Ju dg e, an d Ki ng an d R ei d, Se ni or Ju dg es

.

ORDER (FILED - Apr il 30 , 20 15 )

On co ns id erat io n of th e cert ifi ed or de r su sp en din g re spon de nt fr om the pr act ic e of la w i n th e st at e of Mas sa ch us et ts for a pe rio d o f si x m on th s, t hi s co ur t’s Ja nu ary 29
, 20 15
, or de r su sp en di ng res po nd en t pe nd in g fu rth er act io n of th e co ur t an d di rect in g hi m to sh ow cau se why reci pr oc al di sc ip li ne sh ou ld no t be im po se d, an d th e st at em en t of Bar Co un se l reg ard in g reci pr o c al di sc ip li ne , an d it ap pe ari ng th at

res po nd en t ha s fai le d to fil e a res po ns e to th is co ur t’s or de r to sh ow cau se bu t di d fil e th e aff id av it as r eq ui red by D .C. Bar R . XI, §1 4 (g ) on Feb ru ary 27 , 20 15 , it is

ORDE R ED t h a t Ken ric k A. Sm al l is he reb y su sp en de d fro m th e pr act ic e of la w in th e Dis tri ct of Co lu m bi a fo r a pe rio d si x m on th s, nu nc pr o tu nc to Feb ru ary 27
, 20 15

. Se e In re Si bl ey , 9 90 A.2d 48 3 (D.C. 20 10 ), an d In re Ful le r , 9 30 A.2d 19 4, 19 8 (D.C. 20 07 ) (reb ut ta bl e pr es um pt io n of id en ti cal reci pr oc al di sc ip li ne ap pl ie s to al l ca se s i n wh ic h t he res po nd en t d oe s n ot pa rti ci pa te ).

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           8,778
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             689
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 6,100
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     50,530
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          75,566
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            76,160
<LOANS>                                        191,344
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,501
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 341,247
<DEPOSITS>                                     290,380
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,524
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,332
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,011
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 341,247
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  4,192
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,667
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   118
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,977
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,877
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,877
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,100
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       30
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,037
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,310
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,310
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       998
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .43
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.51
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                       392
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    701
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,477
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        9
<RECOVERIES>                                         3
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,501
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-40974

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MONTECARLO JACKSON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-297-1

Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Montecarlo Jackson

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Jackson has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 29, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-40974 Document: 00512751189 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
No. 13-40974

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw 

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 13-40974 Document: 00512751189 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
# L_2009328EN.01008301.xml

| 15.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 328/83 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 328/83

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1205/2008 of 3 December 2008 implementing Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards metadata

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 326 of 4 December 2008
  )

| — | On page 12, delete the subtitle ‘(Text with EEA relevance)’; |
| --- | --- |

—

On page 12, delete the subtitle ‘(Text with EEA relevance)’;

| — | on page 20, Annex, Part D, point 1.3: |
| --- | --- |

—

on page 20, Annex, Part D, point 1.3:

for:

‘Spatial data services (services)’,

read:

‘Spatial data service (service)’.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3704 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3704

   To clarify the authorized uses of funds in the Crime Victims Fund.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 20, 2012

Mr. Kyl (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To clarify the authorized uses of funds in the Crime Victims Fund.

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

SECTION 1. CRIME VICTIMS FUND.

    Section 1402(d)(3) of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 
10601(d)(3)) is amended by--
            (1) inserting ``(A)'' before ``Of the sums''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(B) Amounts made available under subparagraph (A) may not 
        be used for any purpose that is not specified in subparagraph 
        (A).''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 No. 333-96923, 333-106975, 333-118705, 333-126415 and 333-137258 and Forms S-3 No. 333-123490, 333-136142 and 333-138639) pertaining to the Quantum Fuel Systems Technologies Worldwide,Inc. 2002 Stock Incentive Plan, of our report dated July 16, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Quantum Fuel Systems Technologies Worldwide, Inc., our report dated July 16, 2007 with respect toQuantum Fuel Systems Technologies Worldwide, Inc. management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Quantum Fuel Systems TechnologiesWorldwide, Inc., included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended April 30, 2007. 

/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

Irvine, California 

July 16, 2007
**Exhibit 21**

 

**Lyris, Inc.**

 

**SUBSIDIARIES**

** **
| **Subsidiary**                   | ** ** | **Jurisdiction  of Incorporation** |
|----------------------------------|------------|------------------------------------|
| Commodore  Resources, Inc.  |       | Nevada                             |
| NC Holdings, Inc.           |       | Nevada                             |
| Admiral Management  Company      |       | Delaware                           |
| Lyris  Technologies, Inc.   |       | Delaware                           |
| Uptilt, Inc.                |       | Delaware                           |
| ClickTracks Analytics, Inc. |       | California                         |
| Hot Banana  Software, Inc.  |       | Ontario, Canada                    |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7337
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CLEVELAND NELSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-57) Submitted: January 28, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cleveland Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Jane J. Jackson, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Cleveland Nelson appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on Nelson’s Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e) motion for return of property and denying his motion for reconsideration. SeeUnited States v. Nelson , No. CR-94-57 (E.D.N.C. June 24, 2003; Aug. 18, 2003). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error because Nelson had notice of the contested forfeiture no later than April 1995, more than six years before he filed the Rule 41(e) motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a) (2000); United States v. Minor , 228 F.3d 352, 359 (4th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, we affirm. 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
**Exhibit 99.1**

**AGGREGATE      SCHEDULE OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST DISTRIBUTIONS TO CERTIFICATEHOLDERS**

| Class | Interest                 | Principal  | Losses | Ending                  Balance |
|-------|--------------------------|------------|--------|---------------------------------|
| A1    | 3,791,301.942,740,880.75 | -          |   | 240,776,119.25                  |
| A2    | 243,264.71               | 175,865.59 | -      | 15,449,134.41                   |
| A3    | 2,335,341.231,688,309.70 | -          |   | 148,311,690.30                  |
| A4    | 467,068.25               | 337,661.94 | -      | 29,662,338.06                   |
| APO   | -                        | 8,048.67   | -      | 2,984,950.46                    |
| AR    | 0.52                     | 100.00     | -      | -                               |
| B1    | 110,619.69               | 13,120.74  | -      | 7,070,879.25                    |
| B2    | 42,817.51                | 5,078.63   | -      | 2,736,921.36                    |
| B3    | 24,969.07                | 2,961.61   | -      | 1,596,038.39                    |
| B4    | 24,969.07                | 2,961.61   | -      | 1,596,038.39                    |
| B5    | 17,848.44                | 2,117.02   | -      | 1,140,882.97                    |
| B6    | 10,710.87                | 1,270.43   | -      | 684,645.56                      |

----
gfed20150303_8k.htm




 

Exhibit 10.3

 

 

Written Description of 

2015 Executive Incentive Compensation Annual Plan - 

Chief Operating Officer

 

 

The following is a description of the material terms of the 2015 Executive Incentive Compensation Annual Plan (the “Plan”) that was adopted by the Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors of Guaranty Federal Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) with respect to the bonus payable to Robin Robeson, the Company’s Chief Operating Officer (the "Executive"), for 2015:

 

The Plan will pay a maximum of $76,000 of which fifty percent (50%) of the bonus amount will be paid in cash and fifty percent (50%) will be paid in the form of restricted stock grants. There are three possible levels of incentive awards: threshold (25%); target (50%); and maximum (100%). For any bonus amount to be paid, the threshold level of performance must be achieved. The bonus amount will be prorated for performance achievements between the threshold and target levels and between the target and maximum levels. The four performance measurements of the Company (and the weight given to each measurement) applicable to each award level are as follows: (i) revenue growth (30%); (ii) net interest margin (20%); (iii) efficiency ratio (20%); and (iv) pre-tax net income (30%). The following minimum criteria must all be satisfied before an award is paid under the Plan: (i) net income of the Company for calendar year 2015 of at least 75% of approved budget to receive full performance incentive and incentive will be reduced by 50% if Company achieves between 50% and 74.99% of budget net income; No incentive will be paid if net income is below 50% of budget; (ii) satisfactory audits as determined by the Board of Directors of the Company after review of findings from regulatory examination reports and applicable audits and reviews; (iii) the bank’s tier 1 leverage capital and total risk-based capital ratios must not fall below 9% and 12%, respectively, and adversely classified assets to tier 1 capital and allowance for loan losses must not exceed 35%; and (iv) satisfactory performance appraisal, actively employed by Guaranty Bank, and in good standing at the time the bonus is paid, which will not be prior to the public release of earnings in 2016 for the calendar year 2015. The Board of Directors of the Company retains the right to make the final determination of the bonus payment and amount, if any, and may consider other pertinent facts prior to making an award of restricted stock. All incentive payments shall be subject to the Company’s Compensation Clawback Policy.

 

The Plan also includes vesting and holding periods for the restricted stock grants. The vesting period for these grants shall be three (3) years from the date of grant. Also, the Executive agrees not to sell, transfer or otherwise dispose of such shares for a period of three (3) years from the date of the award. Exceptions to such restriction on sale, transfer or disposition may be granted for hardship circumstances to be determined by the Committee.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             480
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,918
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        215
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,812
<PP&E>                                           6,024
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,075
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,514
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,250
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           142
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,576
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,514
<SALES>                                          4,553
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,553
<CGS>                                            1,862
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,409
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  13
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    220
<INCOME-TAX>                                       125
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 95
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        95
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
        

</TABLE>
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: December 3, 2015 519953 

________________________________

In the Matter of JUSTYCE HH.,

a Neglected Child.

CLINTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF

SOCIAL SERVICES, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Respondent;

ANDREW II.,

Appellant.

________________________________

Calendar Date: October 22, 2015

Before: Peters, P.J., Garry, Rose and Clark, JJ.

__________

Michelle I. Rosien, Philmont, for appellant.

Ethan D. Bonner, Clinton County Department of Social

Services, Plattsburgh (Ethan D. Bonner of counsel), for

respondent.

Kathleen R. Insley, Plattsburgh, attorney for the child.

__________

Rose, J.

Appeals (1) from an order of the Family Court of Clinton

County (Lawliss, J.), entered September 8, 2014, which granted

petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct

Act articles 10 and 10-A, to continue placement of respondent's

child and modify respondent's visitation rights, and (2) from an

order of protection issued thereon.

As a result of respondent's conviction on drug-related

charges and his subsequent incarceration, his daughter (born in
-2- 519953 

2009) was removed from his care. The child was then adjudicated

to be neglected and placed with foster parents, with whom she has

resided since January 2014. Following a permanency hearing,

Family Court issued a permanency hearing order in September 2014

that, among other things, continued the placement of the child

and modified respondent's visitation rights. The court also

issued an order of protection against respondent. He now appeals

from both orders. 

As respondent acknowledges, the order of protection expired

by its own terms on March 3, 2015 and is now moot (see e.g.

Matter of Dezerea G. [Lisa G.], 97 AD3d 933, 935 [2012]). To the

extent that the September 2014 permanency hearing order limited

respondent's visitation and contact with the child, it has also

been rendered moot by a subsequent permanency hearing order

entered March 16, 2015, which, among other things, significantly

modified the visitation provisions in the September 2014 order

that respondent challenges on this appeal (see e.g. Matter of

Ariel FF., 63 AD3d 1202, 1203 [2009]). We have examined

respondent's remaining contention regarding the propriety of the

removal of restrictions on the foster father's care of the child

in the September 2014 order and find it to be meritless.

Peters, P.J., Garry and Clark, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the order entered September 8, 2014 is

affirmed, without costs.

ORDERED that the appeal from the order of protection is

dismissed, as moot, without costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
# C_2008222EN.01000201.xml

| 30.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5197 — HP/EDS)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 222/03)

On 25 July 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5197. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5197. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---