alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Dale NICHOLS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-4818.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 8, 2013.

Decided: May 24, 2013.

Charles Michael Henter, Henterlaw, PLC, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellant. Timothy J. Heaphy, United States Attorney, Jason S. Beaton, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottes-ville, Virginia, for Appellee.

*192Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Larry Dale Nichols pleaded guilty to conspiracy to provide a prohibited object to a federal inmate, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2006); possession of heroin by an inmate, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1791 (2006); and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2006). The district court sentenced Nichols to 151 months of imprisonment and he now appeals. Finding no error, we affirm.

On appeal, Nichols challenges the reasonableness of the sentence. We review a sentence for reasonableness, applying an abuse of discretion standard. *Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); *see also United States v. Layton,*564 F.3d 330, 335 (4th Cir.2009). In so doing, we examine the sentence for “significant procedural error,” including “failing to calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) [ (2006) ] factors, selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or failing to adequately explain the chosen sentence.” *Gall,*552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586. We will presume on appeal that a sentence within a properly calculated advisory Guidelines range is reasonable. *United States v. Allen,*491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir.2007); *see Rita v. United States,*551 U.S. 338, 346-56, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (upholding presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentence). We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that the sentence is both procedurally and substantively reasonable. *See United States v. Abu Ali,*528 F.3d 210, 271 (4th Cir.2008) (appellate court’s conclusion that a different sentence might be appropriate is insufficient to justify reversal of the district court’s judgment).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid in the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-20655

Summary Calendar

__________________

ELLAR PERRY SIMPSON,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHARLES RAY TAYLOR; 

HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendants-Appellees.

 

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas 

USDC No. H-93-CV-2723

- - - - - - - - - -

May 22, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ellar Perry Simpson has filed motions to proceed in forma

pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal, for transcripts at government

expense, and for appointment of counsel. 

Because Simpson’s proposed issues for appeal concern only

the credibility of witnesses, her appeal is frivolous. See

Martin v. Thomas, 973 F.2d 449, 453 n.3 (5th Cir. 1992) (an
No. 95-20655 

-2-

appellate court may not weigh conflicting evidence or determine

the credibility of witnesses); Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep’t,

811 F.2d 260, 261 (5th Cir. 1986).

Simpson’s motion to proceed IFP is DENIED and her appeal is

DISMISSED as frivolous. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. 

Simpson’s motion for transcripts at government expense and

for appointment of counsel are DENIED as moot.
Clear All

        21 November 2022    

                    Ford’s first CO returns for USS Gerald R. Ford’s first deployment                 
                Rear Adm. John F. Meier, the first-in-class aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford’s (CVN 78) first commanding officer and current commander of Naval Air Force Atlantic, visited Ford during the ship’s first deployment, Nov. 10-11, 2022.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
 
     We consent to the incorporation by reference of our opinion dated March 4,
1998 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of United Companies Financial
Corporation for the year ended December 31, 1997 in the following: Registration
Statement No. 33-15326 on Form S-8 pertaining to the United Companies Financial
Corporation 1986 Employee Incentive Stock Option Plan, Registration Statement
No. 33-17366 on Form S-8 pertaining to the United Companies Financial
Corporation Employees' Savings Plan and Trust, Registration Statement No.
33-29994 on Form S-8 pertaining to the 1989 Stock Incentive Plan and the 1989
Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan, Registration Statement No. 33-54955 on
Form S-8 pertaining to the 1993 Stock Incentive Plan and the 1993 Non-Employee
Director Stock Option Plan, Registration Statement No. 33-68626 on Form S-3
pertaining to the registration of 1,951,204 shares of United Companies Financial
Corporation Common Stock, Registration Statement No. 33-60367 on Form S-3
pertaining to the registration of $200 million of United Companies Financial
Corporation Debt Securities and Preferred Stock, Registration Statement No.
33-52739 on Form S-3 pertaining to the registration of 200,000 shares of United
Companies Financial Corporation Common Stock, Registration Statement No.
33-63069 on Form S-8 pertaining to the United Companies Financial Corporation
Management Incentive Plan, Registration Statement No. 333-21985 on Form S-3
pertaining to the registration of $500 million of United Companies Financial
Corporation Debt Securities, Preferred Stock and Common Stock and Registration
Statement No. 333-33347 on Form S-8 pertaining to the 1996 Long-Term Incentive
Compensation Plan and the 1996 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan.
 
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
 
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
March 25, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<PAGE>
       
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                  DEC-28-1996
<CASH>                                              15480
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      192156
<ALLOWANCES>                                         5294
<INVENTORY>                                        139831
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   353987
<PP&E>                                             363015
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (207287)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     792967
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              354526
<BONDS>                                            336606
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             2
<COMMON>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                          40784
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       792967
<SALES>                                            902797
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   902797
<CGS>                                              576417
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      813166
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  21022
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     68609
<INCOME-TAX>                                        18400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 50209
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     (1088)
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                        49121
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        8278
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        8278
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-04518-AKH Document 31 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-04518-AKH Document 31 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 2 of 2
2988442.1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

--------------------------------------------------------------X

IN RE: WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE

LITIGATION

-------------------------------------------------------------

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No.:

21 MC 102 (AKH)

ZOILA PASTUIZACA,

Plaintiffs,

- against -

WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC., et al,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Index No.:

07-CV-05308-AKH

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF

ANSWER BY DEFENDANT

WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.

-----------------------------------------------------------------X

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. (“Weston”), by

and through its attorneys, WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP, as

and for its response to the allegations set forth in the Complaint By Adoption (Check-off

Complaint) Related to the Master Complaint filed in the above-captioned action hereby adopts

the responses and defenses in Weston’s Answer to the Master Complaint, dated August 3, 2007.

To the extent that Weston’s Answer to the Master Complaint fails to address any allegation(s) in

the above-captioned action, Weston denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a

belief as to the truth of the allegation(s).

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Weston reserves the right to amend or

supplement this answer and to interpose cross-claims against any and all co-defendants or any

additional parties named in the above-captioned action.

Case 1:07-cv-05308-AKH Document 12 Filed 01/02/2008 Page 1 of 3
2

2988442.1

WHEREFORE, Weston demands judgment dismissing the above-captioned action and

any cross-claims as against Weston, together with its costs and disbursements.

Dated: New York, New York

January 2, 2008

Yours etc.,

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP

By: /s/ Jason Harrington

Jason Harrington (JH7273)

Attorneys for Defendant

Weston Solutions, Inc.

150 E 42

nd

Street

New York, NY 10017

(212) 490-3000 (p)

(212) 490-3038 (f)

To: All parties via ECF

Case 1:07-cv-05308-AKH Document 12 Filed 01/02/2008 Page 2 of 3
3

2988442.1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 2

nd

day of January 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF ANSWER BY DEFENDANT WESTON SOLUTIONS,

INC. with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which sends e-mail notification to

appearing parties.

By: /s/ Jason Harrington

Jason Harrington (JH7273)

Attorneys for Defendant

Weston Solutions, Inc.

150 E 42

nd

Street

New York, NY 10017

(212) 490-3000 (p)

(212) 490-3038 (f)

Case 1:07-cv-05308-AKH Document 12 Filed 01/02/2008 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Jeffrey L. Garon, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Tripath Technology, Inc.;



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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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) [omitted pursuant to SEC Release No. 33-8238]



(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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



(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrant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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date: August 9, 2005



|                                                                    
|--------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ JEFFREY L. GARON                                                
|Jeffrey L. Garon Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

WILLIAMS FIELD SERVICES §

GROUP, LLC, §

§ No. 488, 2019

Plaintiff Below, §

Appellant § Court Below: Chancery Court

§ of the State of Delaware

v. §

§ C.A. No. 2019-0350 JTL

CAIMAN ENERGY II, LCC; §

ENCAP FLATROCK MIDSTREAM §

FUND II, L.P.; ENCAP ENERGY §

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND, L.P.; §

TT-EEIF CO-INVESTMENTS, LLC; §

UT EEIF SIDE CAR, LLC; LIC-EEIF§

SIDE CAR, LLC; OAKTREE §

CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.P.; §

HIGHSTAR IV CAIMAN II §

HOLDINGS, LLC; FR BR §

HOLDINGS LLC; JACK M. §

LAFIELD; RICHARD D. §

MONCRIEF; STEPHEN L. ARATA; §

WILLIAM R. LEMMONS, JR., §

DENNIS F. JAGGI; STEVEN §

GUDOVIC; AND BLUE RACER §

MIDSTREAM LLC, §

§

Defendants Below, §

Appellees. §

Submitted: July 22, 2020

Decided: August 3, 2020

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; TRAYNOR and MONTGOMERY-REEVES

Justices.
2

ORDER

This 3rd day of August, 2020, after careful consideration of the parties’ 

arguments, briefs and the record on appeal, it appears to the Court that the judgment 

of the Court of Chancery should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons stated 

in its September 25, 2019 Memorandum Opinion.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of 

Chancery is AFFIRMED. 

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gary F. Traynor

Justice
Clear All

        23 February 2024    

                    The Invisible Hand Helping Communities Heal: The Sailors Behind Navy Mortuary Services                 
                ROTA, Spain - Being the one left behind after a death is not easy. One moment, everything seems normal; and the next, you realize life will never be the same. During that emotional and stressful time, the Sailors of Navy Mortuary Services step in to lighten the burden.“Someone’s got to,” said Senior            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
Case 1:07-cv-05366-AKH Document 11-2 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05366-AKH Document 11-2 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05366-AKH Document 11-2 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 3 of 3
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.41

             EXTENSION AGREEMENT TO CONTINUE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                  BETWEEN JAMES P. ULM, II ("EXECUTIVE") AND
          POGO PRODUCING COMPANY, A DELAWARE CORPORATION ("COMPANY"),
                       DATED EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 2001


          WHEREAS, Executive and Company are parties to an "Employment
Agreement" bearing an original "Effective Date" of February 1, 2000; and

          WHEREAS, February 1, 2001, (even date herewith) is hereby deemed to be
the "Renewal Date" in that Employment Agreement; and

          WHEREAS, Executive and Company each wish to extend said Employment
Agreement for an additional one-year period so as to terminate (unless further
extended) two years thereafter, (to-wit January 31, 2003); and

          WHEREAS, Company desires to retain the services of Executive for the
benefit of Company and its shareholders, and desires to induce Executive to
remain in its employ for that extended time period; and

          WHEREAS, Executive has agreed to continue to serve as an employee of
Company for the period specified herein from and after the date of this
Extension Agreement; and

          WHEREAS, Company and Executive desire to enter into this Extension
Agreement in order to formally secure for Company the benefit of the experience
and abilities of Executive, and to set forth the agreements and understandings
of Company and Executive; and

          WHEREAS, Company has advised Executive that execution and performance
of this Extension Agreement by Company has been duly authorized and approved by
all requisite corporate action on the part of the Company.
<PAGE>

          NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual
promises and agreements herein contained, and in consideration of the sum of $10
paid by Company to Executive, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged by
Executive, Executive and Company do hereby agree as follows:

          1. The Employment Agreement between Executive and Company bearing an
"Effective Date" of February 1, 2000 and a "Renewal Date" which is deemed herein
to be February 1, 2001, is hereby extended for an additional one-year period
commencing February 1, 2002 and ending January 31, 2003, unless such employment
period is hereafter further extended for an additional period by both Executive
and Company.

          2. All provisions of the Employment Agreement between Executive and
Company dated as of February 1, 2000, and as it is herein amended, are continued
in full force and effect without change as if the Employment Agreement had been
initially effective as of February 1, 2001.

                     POGO PRODUCING COMPANY



                     By: /s/ JOHN O. McCOY, JR.
                     --------------------------


ATTEST:

/s/ JOE ANN KINGDON
-----------------------------
Assistant Corporate Secretary

                          EMPLOYEE:


                          /s/ JAMES P. ULM, II
                          --------------------
                             James P. Ulm, II
Case 1:07-cv-05313-AKH Document 23 Filed 01/25/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05313-AKH Document 23 Filed 01/25/2008 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 1 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 2 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 3 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 4 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 5 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 6 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 7 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 8 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 29 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 9 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-01544-AKH     Document 6      Filed 09/06/2007     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-01544-AKH     Document 6      Filed 09/06/2007     Page 2 of 2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 14, 2010 

Order 

 

October 14, 2010 

139617 (82)(83)(89) 

2000 BAUM FAMILY TRUST, BAUM FAMILY 

TRUST, JOSEPH BEAUDOIN, SANDRA 

BEAUDOIN, ADELE MEGDALL REVOCABLE 

TRUST, PAUL NOWAK & JOAN NOWAK TRUST, 

MARILYN ORMSBEE, MARK SCHWARTZ, 

WENDY SCHWARTZ, and THOMAS THOMASON, 

Plaintiffs/Counter 

Defendants-Appellants, 

 SC: 139617 

v COA: 284547 

 Charlevoix CC: 07-061121-CH 

WILLIAM BABEL, JUDY BABEL, JAMES 

CAHILL, GLORIA CAHILL, DANIEL ENGSTROM, 

PENNY ENGSTROM, ARTHUR A. RANGER TRUST, 

PATRICIA L. RANGER TRUST, and CHARLEVOIX 

COUNTY ROADCOMMISSION, 

 Defendants/Counter 

 Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

and 

AL GOOCH, ELIZABETH GOOCH, JESSE 

HALSTEAD, and LINDA HALSTEAD, 

 Intervening Defendants/ 

 Counter Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

and 

CHARLEVOIX TOWNSHIP, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, motions by appellee Charlevoix County Road 

Commission and by amicus County Road Association of Michigan for extension of time for 

filing their briefs are GRANTED. The motion by Charlevoix Township for extension of time 

is DENIED as moot.