alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-3493

_____________________________

CALVIN T. ANDREWS JR.,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Lester Bass, Judge.

September 17, 2020

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED.

RAY, C.J., and BILBREY and JAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Calvin T. Andrews Jr., pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-40893, No. 333-80003, No. 333-122834 and No. 333-122835) of OYO Geospace Corporation of our reports dated December 4, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements andfinancial statement schedule as of and for the years ended September 30, 2008 and 2007, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2008, which appear in this Form 10-K. 

/s/ UHY LLP 

Houston, Texas 

December 4, 2008
#### In the Matter of Thomas Santorelli, Petitioner, v Cesar A. Perales, as Commissioner of Social Services of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent State Commissioner of Social Services dated February 11, 1985, made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency discontinuing petitioner’s home relief and medical assistance.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The determination that petitioner willfully and without good cause violated his duty to accept a job referral *(see,*18 NYCRR 385.7) was supported by substantial evidence *(see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222, 234).

We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
Independent Director Compensation Policy
The compensation and benefits for service as a member of the Board of Directors is determined by our Board of Directors. Directors employed by us or one of our subsidiaries are not compensated for service on the Board or on any committee of the Board; however, we reimburse each of our directors for any out-of-pocket expenses in connection with attending meetings of our Board of Directors and committees of the Board of Directors. Each of our non-employee directors, are entitled to a fee of $30,000 per year for his or her service as a director. Members of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee each receive an additional $7,500, $5,000 and $2,500, respectively, per year for his or her service on such committee. The chairpersons of the Board, the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee each receive an additional $25,000, $22,000, $10,000, and $7,500, respectively, per year for his or her service as chairperson for such committee.
In addition, on the date of each annual stockholders meeting, each non-employee member of the Board of Directors will be granted $167,600 of restricted stock units based on the closing stock price on the grant date and our Chairman of the Board (provided such Chairman has served as non-employee member of the Board of Directors and Chairman for at least six months before the date of the stockholder meeting) will be granted an additional $25,000 of restricted stock units based on the closing price on the grant date. 
These restricted stock units will vest in full at the following annual stockholders meeting, subject to the director’s continuing service on our Board of Directors. Each newly elected Director who first becomes a non-employee director on a date other than an annual stockholders meeting will be granted a number of restricted stock units equal to the product of (i) the amount obtained by dividing (A) $167,600 by (B) the fair market value of a share of the Company’s Common Stock on the grant date, multiplied by (ii) the amount obtained by dividing (x) 12 minus the number of full months that have elapsed from the immediately preceding annual meeting of stockholders of the Company to the initial grant date, by (y) 12 (the "Pro Rata Grant"). Subject to the director's continued service with the Company, each Pro Rata Grant award will vest in full on the date of the Company's annual stockholders meeting immediately following the initial grant date.
These restricted stock units will also immediately vest in full upon a change in control of the Company. The restricted stock units are to be granted under our 2016 Equity Incentive Plan.
# Official Journal C 221A/7 Ju

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 221A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 657 June 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 221A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 657 June 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 221 A/01 | European Cybersecurity Industrial, Technology and Research Competence Centre – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20080 | 1 |
| 2022/C 221 A/02 | KDT Joint Undertaking – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20081 | 7 |
| 2022/C 221 A/03 | Global Health EDCTP3 Joint Undertaking – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director of the Global Health EDCTP3 Joint Undertaking (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20082 | 14 |
| 2022/C 221 A/04 | The European Environment Agency (EEA) – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20083 | 20 |
| 2022/C 221 A/05 | Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) – Angers (France) – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Vice-President (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 12) – COM/2022/20084 | 26 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2022/C 221 A/01

European Cybersecurity Industrial, Technology and Research Competence Centre – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20080

1

2022/C 221 A/02

KDT Joint Undertaking – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20081

7

2022/C 221 A/03

Global Health EDCTP3 Joint Undertaking – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director of the Global Health EDCTP3 Joint Undertaking (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20082

14

2022/C 221 A/04

The European Environment Agency (EEA) – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Executive Director (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 14) – COM/2022/20083

20

2022/C 221 A/05

Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) – Angers (France) – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Vice-President (Temporary Agent – Grade AD 12) – COM/2022/20084

26

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
# L_2013205EN.01S00301.xml

| 1.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 205/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 205/s3

---

NOTICE TO READERS

Council Regulation (EU) No 216/2013 of 7 March 2013 on the electronic publication of the Official Journal of the European Union

In accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 216/2013 of 7 March 2013 on the electronic publication of the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ L 69, 13.3.2013, p. 1), as of 1 July 2013, only the electronic edition of the Official Journal shall be considered authentic and shall have legal effect.

Official Journal of the European Union

Where it is not possible to publish the electronic edition of the Official Journal due to unforeseen and exceptional circumstances, the printed edition shall be authentic and shall have legal effect in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) No 216/2013.

---
----

Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 July 2006 — Soffass SpA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Sodipan SCA

(Case C-92/06 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Figurative mark ‘NICKY’ - Opposition by the proprietor of the national figurative marks ‘NOKY’ and ‘noky’ - Purely factual assessment - Appeal manifestly inadmissible)

(2006/C 294/36)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Soffass SpA (represented by: V. Biliardo, C. Bacchini and M. Mazzitelli, lawyers)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), (represented by: M. Capostagno, Agent), Sodipan SCA (represented by: N. Bœspflug, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 23 November 2005 in Case T-396/04 Soffass v OHMI whereby the Court dismissed as unfounded an action by the applicant for the figurative mark ‘NICKY’ for goods in Class 15 for annulment of Decision R 699/2003-1 of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 16 July 2004 annulling the decision of the Opposition Division dismissing the opposition brought by the proprietor of the national figurative marks ‘NOKY’ and ‘noky’ for goods in Class 16.

Operative part of the order

----

(1)OJ C 121, 20.05.2006

----
#### Fook Cheung Lung Realty Corp., Plaintiff, v Yang Tze River Realty Corp. et al., Defendants. (And Third Party Actions.) J&A Concrete Corp. et al., Third Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, v QBE Insurance Corporation, Third Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

[942 NYS2d 342]

Order and judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered April 27, 2010, granting J&A Concrete Corp.’s motion for summary judgment declaring that QBE Insurance is obligated to defend and indemnify it in an underlying property damage action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

J&A provided its insurer with notice of plaintiffs property damage claim within a reasonable time *(see Great Canal Realty Corp. v Seneca Ins. Co., Inc.,*5 NY3d 742, 743 [2005]). J&A made a prima facie showing on its motion through the affidavit of its vice president stating the date that J&A arrived at the construction site and the extent of its duties and denying knowledge of the property damage until J&A’s receipt of an attorney’s letter in May of 2007, coupled with the deposition testimony of *561plaintiffs president regarding the date he first noticed the damage, which was before J&A’s arrival. QBE’s claim in opposition that J&A had knowledge of the damage before May of 2007 failed to raise an issue of fact, as evidence of conversations between plaintiffs president and a representative of the general contractor working at the adjoining premises and of complaints to the Department of Buildings would not necessarily have put J&A on notice, and it is mere conjecture that J&A was in fact told by others of the damage. QBE’s claimed need for discovery to oppose the motion reflected an ineffectual mere hope *(see MAP Mar. Ltd. v China Constr. Bank Corp.,*70 AD3d 404 [2010]). In view of the foregoing, we also find that the determination as to the duty to indemnify was not premature. Concur— Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Moskowitz, Freedman and ManzanetDaniels, JJ. [Prior Case History: 2010 NY Slip Op 30986(U).]
Exhibit 32.1



PERICOM SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 this annual report of Pericom Semiconductor Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the twelve months ended July 2, 2005 (the
Report), I, Alex C. Hui, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.



September 15, 2005



By:

/s/ Alex C. HuiAlex C. HuiChief Executive OfficerPericom Semiconductor Corporation
#### In the Matter of David C., Appellant, a Person Alleged to be Mentally Retarded. Wassaic Developmental Center, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Michael C., Appellant, a Person Alleged to be Mentally Ill. Harlem Valley Psychiatric Center, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.)

—Appeals (1) in proceeding No. 1 by the petitioner David C., an alleged mentally retarded person, from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Patsalos, J.), dated June 7, 1984, which struck from the Trial Calendar his proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 15.35 for a rehearing and review of an order of the County Court, Dutchess County (Marlow, J.), dated March 22, 1984, authorizing his continued retention at Wassaic Developmental Center for a period not to exceed two years, and (2) in proceeding No. 2 by the petitioner Michael C., an alleged mentally ill person, from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Patsalos, J.), also dated June 7, 1984, which struck from the Trial Calendar his proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 9.35 for a rehearing and review of an order of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), dated December 19, 1983, authorizing his continued retention at Harlem Valley Psychiatric Center for a period not to exceed 12 months.

Appeal in proceeding No. 2 by the petitioner Michael C. dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements *(see, Matter of Zuckman [Director of Harlem Val. Hosp.],*35 AD2d 835).

*803Order dated June 7, 1984, made in proceeding No. 1 with respect to the petitioner David C., affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Since in proceeding No. 1 the court’s order of continued retention, dated March 22, 1984, was made without a hearing, the petitioner David C. was not entitled to a rehearing and review as provided for in Mental Hygiene Law § 15.35. The Legislature, in enacting Mental Hygiene Law § 15.35, must have intended by use of the word "rehearing” that there first be a hearing, the proceedings of which would then become subject to review upon the application, *inter alia,*of the person whose retention was authorized by court order.

Furthermore, we find that David C. knowingly waived an initial hearing by not requesting one after being advised by the Mental Health Information Service, which represented him on the application for his retention, of his rights and the nature of the proceeding against him. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,419
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,636
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                49,636
<PP&E>                                          42,128
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 167,556
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,587
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,235
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   167,556
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                39,195
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   31,059
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,340
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,265
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,381
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,884
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        

</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 17, 2022

No. 04-22-00423-CV

Blanca J. COLUNGA,

Appellant

v.

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee

From the County Court At Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CV07308

Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On July 12, 2022, appellant filed his notice of appeal. On August 5, 2022, the court 

reporter responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this appeal filed a notification of late 

record, stating that appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the fee for preparing 

the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(b) (stating the court reporter is responsible for 

preparing and filing the reporter’s record if (1) the notice of appeal has been filed, (2) appellant 

has requested the reporter’s record be prepared, and (3) appellant has paid the fee for preparation 

of the record, has made arrangements to pay the fee, or is entitled to appeal without paying the 

fee).

We therefore ORDER appellant to provide written proof to this court on or before 

August 26, 2022, that either: (1) the reporter’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been 

made to pay the reporter’s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the reporter’s 

fee.

If appellant fails to respond within the time provided, we will set a due date for 

appellant’s brief, and the court will only consider those issues or points raised in appellant’s brief 

that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c).

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 17th day of August, 2022.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
#### Park *v.*Mays *et al.*

February 10, 1915.

Lumpkin, J.

This ease is controlled by the decision in *Fidelity Trust Co.*v. *Mays,*142 *Ga.*821 (83 S. E. 961).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*

*72Complaint. Before Judge Daniel. Butts superior court. October 4, 1913.

*W. F.*Watkins, for plaintiff. *John B. L. Smith,*for defendants.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-5077

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus DENNIS GEOVANNY MARQUEZ-CORDOBA, a/k/a Angelo Docavo Tie, a/k/a Dennis Marquez, a/k/a Alfredo Gomez, a/k/a Dennis Geovanny Drakkar, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-05-179) Submitted: May 17, 2006 Decided: June 13, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, William S. Trivette, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Angela Hewlett Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Dennis Geovanny Marquez-Cordoba pled guilty to one count of reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2) (2000). The district court sentenced Marquez-Cordoba to ninety months of imprisonment. On appeal, counsel filed an Anders * brief, in which he states that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but suggests that the district court imposed a sentence that was unreasonable because it was greater than necessary to serve the ends of justice. Marquez-Cordoba was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not filed a brief. We affirm. The district court sentenced Marquez-Cordoba within the applicable advisory Guideline range and well below the twenty-year statutory maximum set forth in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). We cannot conclude that, under these circumstances, Marquez-Cordoba’s sentence is unreasonable. See United States v. Johnson , 445 F.3d 339, 345 (4th Cir. 2006); United States v. Green , 436 F.3d 449, 457 (4th Cir.) (finding that sentence imposed within properly calculated advisory Guideline range is presumptively reasonable), cert. denied , __ U.S. __, 2006 WL 1057741 (U.S. May 22, 2006) (No. 05-10474). In accordance with Anders , we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for- 3 - appeal. We therefore affirm Marquez-Cordoba’s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Marquez-Cordoba, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Marquez-Cordoba requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Marquez-Cordoba. 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
## THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF HUNT COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 10th

day of November, A.D. 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was

determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Jessica Nicole Nance, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee No. 06

- 13

- 00223

- CR

Trial Court No. CR1101695

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Jessica Nicole Nance, has adequately indicated h er inability to

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said C ourt of Appeals, with

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 11th day of June , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 24

- 00412

- CR

Christopher ACOSTA

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2024CR1657

Honorable Stephanie R. Boyd , Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE CHAPA , AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

SIGNED September 4, 2024.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez

, Chief Justice