alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michael-Francis PALMA, petitioner, v. HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD; and Michael-Francis Palma, petitioner, v. Harris County Appraisal District.

No. 18-8947.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, First District denied.
Exhibit 10.4


 


 


 


Date: March 19, 2019


 


Sukullayanee Suwunnavid


3016 Emporium Suites 622 Sukhumvit 24 Alley,


Klongton Khet Khlong Toei,


Krung Thep Maha Nakhon 10110,


Thailand


RE: CONSULTING AGREEMENT


 


Dear Ms Sukullayanee Suwunnavid,


 


Noble Vici Group, Inc. (the “Corporation”),
Ventrepreneur (SG) Private Limited (“VEPL”) and VenVici Private Limited (“VVPL”) (collectively, “We”)
would like to thank you, Sukullayanee Suwunnavid (“Consultant”) for agreeing to supply certain digital offerings and
services (“Services”) to VVPL’s customers through VEPL. You will supply and provide the fulfilment of our customers
order through your arranged online platform and its related digital offerings.




This letter sets forth our agreement whereby Consultant agrees to accept shares of the Corporation’s common stock, par value
$0.0001 (“Common Stock”), as payment in full for the Services and the satisfaction of all of our obligations under
our arrangement with Consultant with respect to the Services. In determining the amount of shares of Common Stock to be issued,
we have carefully considered a number of factors including our share price and the type and amount of digital products and services
offered, among other things.


 


After due consideration, we hereby offer
to issue Ten Million (10,000,000) shares of the Corporation’s Common Stock, par value $0.0001 (the “Shares”),
at a per share price of US$2.00, as payment in full for the Services and the satisfaction of all of the obligations of the Corporation,
VEPL, VVPL and their affiliates and subsidiaries under our arrangement with Consultant with respect to the Services. We further
agree to register the Shares for on a registration statement with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission within
six (6) months after the date of this letter.


 


The Corporation agrees that Consultant
shall be entitled to engage subcontractors, including without limitation, Fame Reserve Limited, to assist it in providing the Services.


 


If the terms of this letter are acceptable
to you, please indicate your acceptance by your signature below. Thank you for your interest in the Corporation.


 


Yours Sincerely,


 


 


/s/ Eldee Tang


Eldee Tang


Chief Executive Officer & Director


 


 


Noble Vici Group, Inc.


 


 


ACKNOWLEDGED
AND AGREED


 


 


/s/ Sukullayanee
Suwunnavid


Sukullayanee Suwunnavid


 


Dated this 19th
day, March 2019
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, '

'

Plaintiff, '

'

versus ' NO. 1:23-CR-65

'

QUINTON EDWARD CROSS, '

'

Defendant. '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Hawthorn conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed 

by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued his Findings of Fact and 

Recommendation on Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate 

judge recommended that the court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. He further 

recommended that the court adjudge the Defendant guilty on Count Two of the Indictment filed 

against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to the magistrate judge’s findings. The court ORDERS 

that the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate 

Judge are ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the 

plea agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Quinton Edward Cross (2), is 

Case 1:23-cr-00065-MAC-CLS Document 60 Filed 02/14/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 194
2

adjudged guilty as to Count Two of the Indictment charging a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 

841(a)(1) - Possession with the Intent to Distribute Cocaine.

Case 1:23-cr-00065-MAC-CLS Document 60 Filed 02/14/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 195
Daniel TAPPEN, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-6406.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District denied.
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF SRK CONSULTING (US), Inc.

The undersigned, SRK Consulting (US)
Inc, (“SRK”) hereby states as follows:

Our firm prepared independent technical
reports, completed in 2009 and 2012 (the “Technical Reports”), concerning the Mt. Hamilton project currently owned
by Mt. Hamilton LLC of Wheat Ridge, Colorado (“MH-LLC”) a controlled subsidiary of Solitario Exploration & Royalty
Corp. (“Solitario”). Portions of the Technical Reports are contained, summarized or referenced in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K of Solitario (the “Form 10-K”) for the year ended December 31, 2012, to be filed with the United
States Securities and Exchange Commission.

We hereby consent to the use of the information
concerning the Technical Reports (and to all references to our firm, including being named as experts) in the Form 10-K and to
the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-146277 on Form S-8, in Registration Statement No. 333-172929
on Form S-3 and in Registration Statement No. 333-183662 on Form S-3 of Solitario Exploration & Royalty Corp. of the information
concerning the Technical Reports, including the references to our firm included with such information, as set forth above in the
Form 10-K.



|                          |  |                                                            |  |                           
|------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------
|SRK Consulting (US), Inc.
|                          | 
|                          |  | /s/
        J.B. Pennington
        Name: J. B. Pennington
|                          |  | Title:                                                     |  | Practice Leader – SRK Reno
|                          |  | Date:                                                      |  | March 1, 2013
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The J. Jill Group, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 28, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned officers certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|/s/GORDON R. COOKEGordon R. Cooke
President, Chief Executive Officer and
Chairman of the Board of Directors |  |  |  | /s/OLGA L. CONLEYOlga L. Conley
PresidentCorporate Services,
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 11, 2003                                                                                       |  |  |  | Date: August 11, 2003                                                                              

---

QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Wilmington Rexford, Inc. (the "Company")
on  Form  10-KSB  for  the  year  ending  September  30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Garrett
K.  Krause,  Chairman  of  the  Board and CEO (principal executive and financial
officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

(1)  The  Report  fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     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.


/s/ Garrett K. Krause
---------------------
Garrett K. Krause
Chairman of the Board and CEO
Principal Executive and Financial Officer


<PAGE>
People's Credit Card Master Trust

       Independent Accountants' Report on Management's Assertion Concerning
              Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for the
               Credit Card Services Division of People's Bank


                         Independent Accountants' Report

People's Bank
850 Main Street
Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604

Bankers Trust Company
Four Albany Street
New York, New York 10006


We have examined the assertion made by the management of People's Bank
("People's") that its Credit Card Services division (which includes the
accounts transferred to and serviced for the People's Bank Credit Card Master
Trust) maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 1999 that was sufficient for the prevention and detection of
errors and fraud in amounts that would be material to People's consolidated
financial statements.  This assertion is included in the accompanying report
entitled Management Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for
the Credit Card Services Division of People's Bank.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
obtaining an understanding of the internal control over financial
reporting, testing, evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of
the internal control, and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

Because of the inherent limitations in any internal control, errors
or fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projections of any
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting to future periods
are subject to the risk that the internal control may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies
or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Credit Card Services division
of People's maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 1999 that was sufficient for the prevention and detection
of errors and fraud in amounts that would be material to People's
consolidated financial statements is fairly stated, in all material respects,
based upon criteria described in Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

/s/ KPMG LLP


Stamford, Connecticut
March 10, 2000
James MATHURIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7988.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**I, Robert A. Bruggeworth, President and Chief Executive Officer of RF MicroDevices, Inc. (the “Company”), certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:(1)        the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscalquarter ended             December 27, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a)             or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

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

/s/Robert A. Bruggeworth                                Robert A. Bruggeworth     President and Chief Executive Officer            February 5, 2009
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-41067

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ANTHONY WAYNE MORRIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:95-CR067

- - - - - - - - - -

January 27, 1999

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Anthony Wayne Morris appeals his convictions of use of

interstate facilities in the commission of a murder for hire and

of solicitation to commit a crime of violence. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 1958, 373. Morris contends that he has established the defense

of entrapment as a matter of law and that, accordingly, the

evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. Morris

further asserts that the district court abused its discretion in

admitting evidence of his rape and kidnapping of the intended 
No. 96-41067

-2-

victim of the charged offenses because this evidence was not

relevant and posed a substantial risk of unfair prejudice. 

Morris asserts that the district court abused its discretion in

admitting evidence that he had raped and kidnapped his ex-wife

Diana Lombardo, for essentially the same reasons.

The evidence presented by the Government established

Morris’s knowing and enthusiastic participation in the murderfor-hire scheme; it was thus sufficient to rebut Morris’s

entrapment defense. United States v. Chavez, 119 F.3d 342, 346

(5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, his conviction of the charged

crimes does not amount to a manifest miscarriage of justice. 

United States v. Thomas, 12 F.3d 1350, 1358 (5th Cir. 1994). 

Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion

in admitting evidence that Morris had kidnapped and raped the

intended victim of his murder-for-hire scheme. This evidence was

relevant to the issue of motive and aided in rebutting Morris’s

entrapment defense. See United States v. Bentley-Smith, 2 F.3d

1368, 1377 (5th Cir. 1993); Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) & 403. 

Likewise, the admission of evidence that Morris had also raped

his ex-wife, Diana Lombardo, did not constitute error as it too

aided in rebutting Morris’s entrapment defense. And even if this

evidence were found to be erroneously admitted, in light of the

overwhelming evidence of Morris’s guilt and the government’s

thorough rebuttal of his entrapment defense, it would constitute

harmless error. See United States v. Gadison, 8 F.3d 186, 192

(5th Cir. 1993). 

AFFIRMED.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A1541. DONALD FUTCH v. THE STATE.

Donald Futch filed this direct appeal from the trial court’s order revoking his

probation for violating special conditions of his probation. An application for

discretionary appeal, however, is required to appeal orders regarding probation

revocation. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (5); White v. State, 233 Ga. App. 873, 873-874 (505

SE2d 228) (1998) (where the underlying subject matter is probation revocation, the

discretionary appeal procedure applies). Futch’s failure to comply with the

discretionary appeal procedure deprives us of jurisdiction to consider this appeal,

which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

April 20, 2017

04/20/2017
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

MARK A. DONALDSON, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-3436 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed April 27, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Margaret O. Steinbeck, Judge. Mark A. Donaldson, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT OWEN D. DENSON, JR., a/k/a HIKIM ) SHABAZZ, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4262 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed April 4, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Chris Helinger, Judge. Owen D. Denson, Jr., pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MORRIS, SLEET, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
Pedro RODRIGUEZ, petitioner, v. William D. GORE, Sheriff, San Diego County, California.

No. 18-6192.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 11744]

Based upon a review of the Administrative Record assembled in this matter and in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, I conclude that the circumstances that were the basis for the designation of the Gama'a al-Islamiyya (and other aliases) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization have changed in such a manner as to warrant revocation of the designation.

Therefore, I hereby determine that the designation of Gama'a al-Islamiyya (and other aliases) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, pursuant to Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1189), shall be revoked.

                    This determination shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

*Authority:*8 U.S.C. 1189.                

Dated: May 11, 2022.

Antony J. Blinken,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2022-10859 Filed 5-19-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-AD-P
<PAGE>
 
                                   Exhibit 12

                      RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                                        Years Ended December 31,
                                                1997            1996            1995              1994            1993
                                           --------------   -------------  ----------------  --------------  ---------------
<S>                                        <C>              <C>            <C>               <C>             <C>       
Fixed Charges:                                  
  Interest Expense (including 
    amortization of deferred debt cost)     $     9,525      $    9,414      $     8,747      $     7,276      $    6,444       
  Interest Capitalized                            4,650           1,993            1,538              343              --   
                                           --------------   -------------  ----------------  --------------  ---------------
         Total Fixed Charges                $    14,175      $   11,407      $    10,285      $     7,619      $    6,444
                                           ==============   =============  ================  ==============  =============== 
Earnings:
   Net (loss) before income tax benefit, 
     net gain (loss) on real estate sales
     extraordinary items and 
     cumulative effect of change in 
     accounting principle                   $     27,585     $    16,682     $    10,782      $     5,227      $   (1,196)
   Fixed Charges                                  14,175          11,407          10,285            7,619           6,444
   Capitalized Interest                           (4,650)         (1,993)         (1,538)            (343)             --
                                           --------------   -------------  ----------------  --------------  ---------------
         Total Earnings                     $     37,110      $   26,096     $    19,529      $    12,503      $    5,248
                                           ==============   =============  ================  ==============  =============== 

Ratio of Earnings of Fixed Charges                  2.62            2.29            1.90             1.64            *

</TABLE> 

* The Company's earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges for the year 
  ended December 31, 1993.
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 10/09/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       45,411
COMMITMENTS
   8,789    1,164    1,469   24,354   33,016   34,611   35,648   10,800    9,763

CHANGES FROM 10/02/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        779)
    -305     -181      -29    1,292      962      958      751     -179       27

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    19.4      2.6      3.2     53.6     72.7     76.2     78.5     23.8     21.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       55)
      12        6        7       31       21       48       31
```

----

Updated October 12, 2012
MMA CONSULTANTS 1, INC., petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF PERU.

No. 17-1536.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

*86Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.