alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
/C3W¥

ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA # 03-11-00345-CR OFFENSE: 21.04

Wesley Schaefer v. The State of

STYLE: Texas COUNTY: Hays

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: 22nd District Court

DATE: 07/10/14 Publish: NO TCCASE#: CR-10-0489

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Wesley Schaefer v. The State of

STYLE: Texas

PRO &FL

CCA#: I03WV

Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE: J&,//<>/x>rf

JUDGE:

^ WtS^fo^

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
**EXHIBIT
12.2**
  I, **** David
Zigdon, certify that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of RADCOM Ltd.;
  2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;
  3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;
  4. The
company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:
  (a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the company, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;
  (b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
  (c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
company’s internal control over financial reporting; and
  5. The
company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s
auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
  (a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and
  (b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
  ****Date: March 30,
2005
    By:
    /s/ David ZigdonDavid ZigdonChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer)
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

August 2022 AMWG Directive #2

TWG Webinar Meeting

October 12, 2022

Michael Moran

Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center

Southwest Biological Science Center
August 2022 AMWG Directive #2

“Evaluation of Downstream Resource Impacts under LowElevations/Low-flows – The second of the LE/LF actions is to task 

GCMRC with developing a proposed schedule and budget for 

evaluating the potential downstream impacts to LTEMP resources of 

water surface elevation at Lake Powell dropping below minimum power 

pool and below dead pool for any period greater than three months. We 

would ask that the proposed schedule and budget be completed by 

October 15, 2022. GCMRC will need to coordinate with Reclamation 

modelers on results that may be available to blend into coupledmodeling activities. In other words, taking the CRMMS probabilistic 

results and using them in GCMRC’s temperature, water quality, and fish 

models to determine impacts for each resource under the Adaptive 

Management Program.”
Progress To Date on Directive

 GCMRC scientists/leadership met internally and

with Reclamation on several occasions to clarify

the scope and outline the work tasks involved

 Near-term plan for work is to obtain worst-case

CRMSS traces and look at associated expected

water quality

 Evaluate whether existing models can be used to

predict impacts of new flows and water quality

on biological resources or if models need to be

modified or newly developed to address novel

conditions
Progress To Date on Directive Cont.

 Proposal has not been fully developed and

will not meet October 15, 2022 deadline

 GCMRC staffing and capacity issues,

combined with a heavy workload, have

reduced our ability to meet this deadline

 We anticipate having a draft proposal by the

15th of November; however, this new deadline

is contingent upon GCMRC staff availability

and workload
#### Anderson *v.*Horn.

*(City Court of New York, Special Term.*

June 10, 1889.)

Judgment—Motion to Vacate—Misnomer of Defendant.

Where defendant is sued in the name of John Horn, which the complaint alleges is his correct name, and defendant answers in the name of John A. Horan, which he alleges is his correct name, and the answer is returned, and judgment taken by default, a motion to vacate the judgment will not be passed on until the court has ascertained which is defendant’s name.

At chambers. Action by Mary A. Anderson against John Horn. After the answer had been served, and plaintiff’s attorneys had admitted service, they returned the answer because defendant was described as John A. Horan, stating that they had no such suit in their office, and, receiving no reply, proceeded in the usual six days to enter judgment in favor of plaintiff. Defendant now moves to vacate the judgment, and all subsequent proceedings.

*James J.*Thornley, for plaintiff. *McCall <& Arnold,*for defendant.

McAdam, C. J.

A defendant ought to be sued in the surname of his ancestors, and the Christian name given to him in baptism. *Bank*v. *Magee,*20 N. Y. 355, 363. If the defendant is known by two names, he may be sued by either, *(Eagleston*v. *Son,*5 Rob., N. Y., 640,) or that by which he is generally known, though not his real name, *(Cooper*v. *Burr,*45 Barb. 9;) or, if the real name be unknown, he may be sued by a fictitious name, adding a description identifying the person intended, (Code Civil Proc. § 451,) such as “the man in command of the ship Hornet,” *(Pindar*v. *Black,*4 How. Pr. *995.) This liberality in practice fails, however, to prevent the ever-recurring confusion paused by misnaming the defendant,—an error which becomes more difficult to repair as the proceeding advances. The plaintiff charges that the defendant engaged board under the name of “John Howard,” and that his correct name is “John Horn,” and by this name the defendant was sued. He undertook to defend in the name of “John A. Horan,” which he claims to be his correct cognomen. His plea was returned. It is not a case of misspelling or of *idem sonans,*but of misnomer or nothing. The court must first ascertain the defendant’s true name or his *alias dictas*before it can undertake to decide whether he has been correctly proceeded against or not. When the facts are settled, there will be no trouble in correctly- applying the law. The parties must appear in court for oral examination on June 11th, at 2 p. m. On the conclusion of the examination the application will be decided.
Exhibit 23.1




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We consent to the incorporation by
reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-102592, 333-110115, 333-140105 and
333-142013 on Forms S-3, Registration Statement Nos. 333-64495, 333-33481,
333-99099 and 333-108419 on Forms S-8 of our reports dated March 11, 2008,
relating to our audits of the consolidated financial statements and internal
control over financial reporting, which appear in this Annual Report on Form
10-K of Altair Nanotechnologies, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended
December 31, 2007.






/s/
      Perry-Smith LLP






Sacramento,
California


March 11,
2008
#### MOODY, Respondent, v. EVARTS et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

October 16, 1896.)

Action by William W. Moody against Merriam W. Evarts and others.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.
#### In re DILLON’S ESTATE. In the matter of Robert J. Dillon, deceased.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June, 1896.)

No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs.
#### BUGBEE, Respondent, v. PRESIDENT, ETC., OF DELAWARE & H. CANAL CO., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

September 29, 1896.)

Action by Philemon B. Bugbee against the president, managers, and company of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Company.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur.
Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Meeting

September 7-8, 1999

List of Attachments

No. Title Author / Presenter

1 Attendance Sheets

2 SWCA Team Presentation Rich Valdez

3 Questions for the KAS Review Panel Bill Persons

4 FY 2001 Integrated Science Plan Barry Goldq

5 Experimental Flows Ad Hoc Group Progress Report Bill Persons
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1698 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1698

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 24, 2015

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend design and content requirements for certain gold and silver 
                     coins, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Bullion and Collectible Coin 
Production Efficiency and Cost Savings Act''.

SEC. 2. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

    Title 31, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in section 5112--
                    (A) in subsection (q)--
                            (i) by striking paragraphs (3) and (8); and
                            (ii) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), 
                        (6), and (7) as paragraphs (3), (4), (5), and 
                        (6), respectively;
                    (B) in subsection (t)(6)(B), by striking ``90 
                percent silver and 10 percent copper'' and inserting 
                ``not less than 90 percent silver''; and
                    (C) in subsection (v)--
                            (i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Subject 
                        to'' and all that follows through ``the 
                        Secretary shall'' and inserting ``The Secretary 
                        shall'';
                            (ii) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``The 
                        Secretary'' and inserting ``To the greatest 
                        extent possible, the Secretary'';
                            (iii) in paragraph (5), by inserting after 
                        ``may issue'' the following: ``collectible 
                        versions of''; and
                            (iv) by striking paragraph (8); and
            (2) in section 5132(a)(2)(B)(i), by striking ``90 percent 
        silver and 10 percent copper'' and inserting ``not less than 90 
        percent silver''.

SEC. 3. AMERICAN EAGLE SILVER BULLION 30TH ANNIVERSARY.

    Proof and uncirculated versions of coins issued by the Secretary of 
the Treasury pursuant to subsection (e) of section 5112 of title 31, 
United States Code, during calendar year 2016 shall have a smooth edge 
incused with a designation that notes the 30th anniversary of the first 
issue of coins under such subsection.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 23, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
1The Honorable Harold D. Vietor, United States District Judge for the Southern

District of Iowa. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_______________

Nos. 99-1464/1466

________________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 * Appeals from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Southern District of Iowa. 

Lamont Gentry Falls, *

 * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

__________

 Submitted: November 5, 1999

 Filed: November 9, 1999

___________

Before BOWMAN, FAGG, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lamont Gentry Falls appeals from the district court’s1 orders denying his motion

to remand for an evidentiary hearing on the accuracy of his trial transcript, and denying

his motion for a new trial. 
-2-

After careful review, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion

in denying the motion for a new trial: Falls’s discovery of a jury request to view a

video surveillance tape did not constitute “newly discovered” evidence, and the motion

was untimely if it was based on any other ground. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 33; United

States v. Castillo, 171 F.3d 1163, 1167 (8th Cir. 1999) (standard of review); United

States v. Luna, 94 F.3d 1156, 1161 (8th Cir. 1996) (prerequisites for new trial based

on newly discovered evidence). 

We also conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review the denial of the motion to

remand for an evidentiary hearing, because the notice of appeal concerning this ruling

was untimely. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i) (criminal defendant’s notice of appeal

must be filed in district court within 10 days after entry of order being appealed);

United States v. Robinson, 64 F.3d 403, 404-05 (8th Cir. 1995) (court lacks jurisdiction

to review where notice of appeal is untimely filed). 

Accordingly, we dismiss Falls’s appeal of the district court’s denial of his motion

to remand for an evidentiary hearing, and affirm the district court’s denial of his motion

for a new trial. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

                  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Alkermes Clinical
Partners, L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September
30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, James M. Frates, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of Alkermes Development Corporation II, General Partner of the Partnership,
certify, pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,18 U.S.C. ss.
1350 that:

         1.       The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

         2.       The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Partnership.



                                    /s/  James M. Frates
                                    ---------------------------
                                    James M. Frates
                                    Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
                                    of Alkermes Development Corporation II,
                                    General Partner of Alkermes Clinical
                                    Partners, L.P. November 13, 2003
Exhibit 10.1


 


SERVICE PROPERTIES TRUST


 


Summary of Trustee Compensation


 


The following is a summary of the currently effective
compensation of the Trustees of Service Properties Trust (the “Company”) for services as Trustees, which is subject to modification
at any time by the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) or the Compensation Committee of the Board, as applicable:


 


	 	•	Each Independent Trustee receives an annual fee of $75,000 for services as a Trustee. The annual fee for any new Independent Trustee is prorated for the initial year.


 


	 	•	Each Independent Trustee who serves as a committee chair of the Board’s Audit Committee, Compensation Committee or Nominating and Governance Committee receives an additional annual fee of $17,500, $12,500 and $12,500, respectively. The committee chair fee for any new committee chair is prorated for the initial year.


 


	 	•	The Lead Independent Trustee receives an additional annual cash retainer fee of $15,000 for serving in this role.


 


	 	•	Each Trustee receives a grant of 7,000 of the Company’s common shares of beneficial interest on the date of the first Board meeting following each annual meeting of shareholders (or, for Trustees who are first elected or appointed at other times, on the day of the first Board meeting attended).


 


	 	•	The Company generally reimburses all Trustees for travel expenses incurred in connection with their duties as Trustees and for out of pocket costs incurred in connection with their attending certain continuing education programs.
#### NEWCOMBE, Respondent, v. EAGLETON, Appellant.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

December 12, 1896.)

Action by Ida M. Newcombe against Thomas Eagleton. Foley & Early, for appellant. Booraem, Hamilton & Beckett, for respondent.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. See 38 N. Y. Supp. 424.
Presidential Documents

50601 

Federal Register 

Vol. 86, No. 172 

Thursday, September 9, 2021 

Title 3— 

The President 

Notice of September 7, 2021 

Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Foreign Interference in or Undermining Public Confidence in 

United States Elections 

On September 12, 2018, by Executive Order 13848, the President declared 

a national emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United 

States constituted by the threat of foreign interference in or undermining 

public confidence in United States elections. 

Although there has been no evidence of a foreign power altering the outcomes 

or vote tabulation in any United States election, foreign powers have historically sought to exploit America’s free and open political system. In recent 

years, the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications 

has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity 

of the threat of foreign interference. The ability of persons located, in whole 

or in substantial part, outside the United States to interfere in or undermine 

public confidence in United States elections, including through the unauthorized accessing of election and campaign infrastructure or the covert distribution of propaganda and disinformation, continues to pose an unusual and 

extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United 

States. For this reason, the national emergency declared on September 12, 

2018, must continue in effect beyond September 12, 2021. Therefore, in 

accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 

1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in 

Executive Order 13848 with respect to the threat of foreign interference 

in or undermining public confidence in United States elections. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with FR_PREZDOC5
50602 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 172 / Thursday, September 9, 2021 / Presidential Documents 

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to 

the Congress. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

September 7, 2021. [FR Doc. 2021–19625 

Filed 9–8–21; 11:15 am] 

Billing code 3295–F1–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with FR_PREZDOC5BIDEN.EPS</GPH>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM PURCHASE
POINT  MEDIA  CORPORATION  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  AT MARCH 31, 2000 AND THE NINE
MONTHS  THEN  ENDED  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>      1

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                   0
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    16,525
<PP&E>                                               5,913
<DEPRECIATION>                                         948
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      47,239
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              880,582
<BONDS>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                           498,134
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                            170
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,331,647)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        47,239
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      270,129
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  99,520
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (369,649)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (369,649)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (369,649)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.03)


</TABLE>
(August 24, 1987)

#### State of New York ex rel. Brian Barrett, on Behalf of John P. Galanis, Appellant, v Richard J. Koehler et al., Respondents.

Motion granted insofar as to delete the provisions contained in paragraphs (f) and (g) of the memorandum decision accompanying the order of this court entered on July 23, 1987 [132 AD2d 491] and to substitute in lieu thereof the following: "(f) the defendant, John Peter Galanis, if released from custody pursuant to this order, shall report in person, seven days per week, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., to a member of the New York City Police Department, designated by the commanding officer of the New York City *50Police Department Detective Squad for the office of the New York City District Attorney, and (g) the defendant John Peter Galanis is restricted to the confines of the City of New York; the County of Westchester for purposes of securing his attendance at proceedings in the United States Courthouse in White Plains, New York; and elsewhere in the State of New York as required by the United States Attorney”. Concur— Murphy, P. J., Sandler, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.