alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Dewitt Gibson, Petitioner, v Brian Fischer, Commissioner, New York State Department of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[947 NYS2d 867]

Motion for reargument is granted and, upon reargument, the order entered April 20, 2012 (94 AD3d 1418) is amended by deleting the order*1704ing paragraph and substituting the following ordering paragraph, “It is hereby ordered that the determination is unanimously modified on the law and the petition is granted in part by annulling those parts of the determination finding that petitioner violated inmate rules 102.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [b] [3] [i]) and 104.11 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [5] [ii]) and vacating the recommended loss of good time and as modified the determination is confirmed without costs, respondent is directed to expunge from petitioner’s institutional record all references to the violation of those inmate rules, and the matter is remitted to respondent for further proceedings,” and by adding the following memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination, following a tier III hearing, that petitioner had violated various inmate rules, including inmate rules 102.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [3] [i] [threats]) and 104.11 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [5] [ii] [violent conduct]). As respondent correctly concedes, the determination with respect to those two inmate rules is not supported by substantial evidence *(see generally People ex rel. Vega v Smith,*66 NY2d 130, 139 [1985]). We therefore modify the determination and grant the petition in part by annulling those parts of the determination finding that petitioner violated those two inmate rules, and we direct respondent to expunge from petitioner’s institutional record all references to the violation of those rules. Although we need not remit the matter to respondent for reconsideration of those parts of the penalty already served by petitioner, we note that there was also a recommended loss of good time, and the record does not reflect the relationship between the violations and that recommendation. We therefore further modify the determination by vacating the recommended loss of good time, and we remit the matter to respondent for reconsideration of that recommendation. We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Present — Smith, J.P., Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from balance
sheets and a statement of operations and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1997              JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1998             MAR-29-1997
<CASH>                                          23,330                   4,029
<SECURITIES>                                         0                   4,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,081                   9,195
<ALLOWANCES>                                       234                      21
<INVENTORY>                                     24,851                   1,164
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                84,538                  19,698
<PP&E>                                          47,041                   5,302
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,010                     132
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 869,551                 142,078
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           64,374                   7,853
<BONDS>                                        202,377                 100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          217,626                  33,160
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (63,597)                    (71)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   869,551                 142,078
<SALES>                                         89,385                  21,253
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                89,385                  21,253
<CGS>                                           37,734                   7,167
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   70,654                  14,420
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                65,796                   4,276
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    94                      21
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,837                   2,654
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (63,316)                   (118)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (360)                    (47)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (62,956)                    (71)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,876                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (64,832)                    (71)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration StatementNo. 333-30412 on Form S-3, and Nos. 333-39055, 333-43934, 333-51229, 333-58522 and 333-122387 on Form S-8 of Pericom Semiconductor Corporation of our reports dated September 20, 2007 relating to the financial statements and financialstatement schedule of Pericom Semiconductor Corporation as of June 30, 2007 and July 1, 2006 and for each of the two years in the period ended June 30, 2007, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting as of June 30, 2007 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2007, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 

/s/ Burr, Pilger & Mayer LLP 

San Jose, California 

September 20, 2007
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 2.4

Eastern Division

Katherine Albrecht, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.:

1:03−cv−06472

Hon. Morton

Denlow

Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, May 9, 2005:

 MINUTE entry before Judge Morton Denlow : This case having been reassigned

to Magistrate Judge Cole, the status hearing set for 5/19/05 is stricken. All other dates to

stand pending further order of Magistrate Judge Cole.Judicial staff mailed notice(dmk, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 67 Filed: 05/09/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:403
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       2,647,469
<SECURITIES>                                   154,242
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,569,324
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    647,585
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,258,796
<PP&E>                                         351,463
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,900,435
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,381,743
<BONDS>                                      1,259,436
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          456,250
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,133
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,657,734
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,900,435
<SALES>                                      1,504,364
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,504,364
<CGS>                                          873,335
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  873,335
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,633,113)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (984,386)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,648,727)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,648,727)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.46)
        

</TABLE>
# Official Journal L 125/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 125 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6321 April 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 125

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6321 April 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Decision (EU) 2020/545 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2020 on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to finance immediate budgetary measures in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak and a reinforcement of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office | 1 |
| | * | Decision (EU) 2020/546 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2020 on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to finance immediate budgetary measures in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak | 3 |
| | * | Decision (EU) 2020/547 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2020 on the mobilisation of the Contingency Margin in 2020 to provide emergency assistance to Member States and further reinforce the Union Civil Protection Mechanism/rescEU in response to the COVID-19 outbreak | 5 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

DECISIONS

*

Decision (EU) 2020/545 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2020 on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to finance immediate budgetary measures in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak and a reinforcement of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office

1

*

Decision (EU) 2020/546 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2020 on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to finance immediate budgetary measures in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak

3

*

Decision (EU) 2020/547 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2020 on the mobilisation of the Contingency Margin in 2020 to provide emergency assistance to Member States and further reinforce the Union Civil Protection Mechanism/rescEU in response to the COVID-19 outbreak

5

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER OF C ONTINUING A BATEMENT

Appellate case name: Henry Earl Cosey v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 11

- 00309

- CR

Trial court case number: 599361 (Count ll)

Trial court: 208th District Court of Harris County

This case was abated and remanded to the trial court on July 18, 2012. In the order of abatement, we ordered the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine whether appellant still wishes to pursue this appeal, to grant or deny appellant’s counsel’s motion to withdraw, and, if the motion was granted, to appoint new appellate counsel. We further ordered the trial court clerk and the court reporter to file their respective records of the hearing no later than August 10, 2012. Nevertheless, neither the trial court clerk nor the court reporter ha s filed a record.

Further, on September 10, 2012, appellant filed a “Motion for Bench Warrant” with the Clerk of this Court, requesting that he be transported “to this court fo r hearing in this matter so that [he] may give testimony.” This motion shows that appellant still wishes to pursue an appeal.

Accordingly, we continue the abatement of this case and ORDER the trial court, within five days of the date of this order, 1 to appoint new appellate counsel to represent appellant in this appeal and to issue a written order of appointment, separate and apart from any docket sheet

notation. See T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN . art. 26.04(p), 64.01(c) , 64.05 (West Supp. 2011);

Fowler v. State , 874 S.W.2d 112, 114 (Tex. App.

— Austin 1994, order, pet. ref’d). We further ORDER the trial court clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s order appointing counsel to represent appellant and the trial court’s order on “Motion to Withdraw as Attorney of Record” (image number 53210225) no later than 10 days from the date

of this order. Finally, a ppellant’s “Motion for Bench Warrant” is D ENIED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Terry Jennings  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: September 20, 2012

1 Because the trial court has previously found appellant indigent, no hearing is necessary and appellant need not be present at the time the trial court appoints new counsel.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       7,586,280
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,739,579
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,409,287
<PP&E>                                         647,655
<DEPRECIATION>                                 117,373
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,457,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          502,095
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,250
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,936,427
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,457,400
<SALES>                                      4,179,645
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,179,645
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,775,631
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             315,672
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,088,342
<INCOME-TAX>                                   403,519
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            684,823
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   684,823
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .23
        

</TABLE>
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Cereal Crops Research: Fargo, ND
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    ETSARC Research Units
                        ETSARC Home page
                                    Office of the Center Director
                                    Location Support Staff
                                    Animal Metabolism-Agricultural Chemicals Research
                                    Cereal Crops Research
                                    Insect Genetics and Biochemistry Research
                                    Sugarbeet and Potato Research
                                    Sunflower and Plant Biology ResearchSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Fargo, North Dakota Edward T. Schafer Agricultural Research Center Cereal Crops Research People & Locations





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People

People and Locations at Fargo, North Dakota   [Expand All] [Collapse All]
  (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
Exhibit 32.1








SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of Logitech International S.A. (“the Company”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section
1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.





Gerald P. Quindlen, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Thomas E. Fergoda, the acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify that, to the best of his knowledge:





(1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and





(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








August 10, 2009









/s/ Gerald P. Quindlen


Gerald P. Quindlen


Chief Executive Officer











/s/ Thomas E. Fergoda


Thomas E. Fergoda
Vice President and Corporate
Controller/Acting Chief Financial Officer
#### Bedingfield *v.*Moye.

June 22, 1915.

Ejectment. Before Judge Hawkins. Laurens superior court. May 1, 1914.

*Davis & Sturgis*and *J. S. Adams,*for plaintiff in error.

*Ira S. Chappell,*contra.

Beck, J.

1. The court erred in admitting in evidence a certain decree affecting adversely the title of the defendant, where the pleadings themselves upon which the decree was based were not introduced in evidence and there was no other competent evidence to show that the defendant in this case or any of his predecessors in title were parties to the ease wherein the decree was rendered.

2. It was error, under the evidence, for the court to charge the jury as follows: “Now the question for you to determine, as I see it in this case, has Dr. Bedingiield [the defendant] been in possession of the land sued for, under color of title, for seven years? If he has, you should find in favor of the defendant. If he has not, you should find in favor of the plaintiff.” This charge is subject to the criticism that it tended to restrict the jury, in passing upon the defendant’s claim that he had a good prescriptive title, to the consideration of the question whether or not the defendant himself had had possession under written color of title, and to exclude from the consideration of the jury the defendant’s contention that he and those under whom he claimed had been in possession under color of title for seven years. And it can not be held that the injurious effects of this charge were sufficiently remedied by the court’s instruction in another portion of the charge, that “the defendant’s possession you tack on to those under whom he claims.”

3. There is nothing in the other grounds of the motion to authorize a reversal of the judgment of the court below.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All Hie Justices concur.*
2 

' 

concluded that although Luckey's petition was timely-mailed, he 

nevertheless failed to demonstrate that its untimely filing was the result 

of official interference. See Gonzales v. State,118 Nev. 590, 595, 53 P.3d 

901, 904 (2002). As a result, the district court determined that Luckey 

failed to demonstrate good cause sufficient to overcome the procedural bar 

and denied his petition. See NRS 34.726(1)(a). The district court did not 

address Luckey's allegation of prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1)(b). 

We conclude the district court erred by finding that Luckey 

failed to demonstrate good cause because an impediment external to the 

defense prevented his petition from being timely-filed. See Hathaway v. 

State,119 Nev. 248, 252, 71 P.3d 503, 506 (2003). We also conclude, 

however, that Luckey failed to demonstrate prejudice because his claim 

that he was improperly advised about the consequences of his guilty plea 

is belied by the record. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687- 

88 (1984); Kirksey v State, 112 Nev. 980, 987-88, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 

(1996). Therefore, Luckey is not entitled to relief, and we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Parraguirre 

i—Ltot , J. 

Hardesty 

cc: Hon. Linda Marie Bell, District Judge 

Kristina M. Wildeveld 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 4W0 r