alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed August 7 , 201 2

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 11

- 00 1 05

- CR

____________ SOLOMON KOFI EQUAM , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 1 8 4 th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 12 10061



### O R D E R

Appellant's counsel filed a brief under the authority of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738(1967) , in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolou s and without merit. On July 12, 2012, this court ordered counsel to file a motion to withdraw and copy of the
transmittal letter to comply with the requirements set forth in Anders

. The order mistakenly stated counsel was appointed.Because counsel is retained, the motion to withdraw must comply with the

requirements of Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Lopez v. State , 283 S.W.3d 479, 480 (Tex. App.

-- Texarkana 2009, ). The motion to withdraw must disclose
current deadlines and settin gs, appellant's name and last known address, a statement that a copy of the motion was delivered to appellant, and a statement that appellant was notified in writing of the right to object to the motion

. See Tex. R. App. P. 6.5 (a) . Further, it must be delivered to appellant in person or mailed by certified and first

- class mail to appellant's
last known address. See Tex. R. App. P. 6.5(b).
Accordingly, w e order Edmond N. O'Suji
, to file a motion to withdraw in
accordance with Rule 6.5 on or before August 17, 2012

.
PER CURIAM
Independent Auditors' Consent




To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of
Smith Barney Telecommunications Trust:
We consent to the incorporation by reference, in
this Prospectus and Statement of Additional
Information, of our report dated February 11, 2000,
on the statement of assets and liabilities for the
Smith Barney Telecommunications Trust as of December
31, 1999, and the related statement of operations
for the year then ended, the statements of changes
in net assets for each of the years in the two-year
period then ended and the financial highlights for
each of the years in the five-year period then
ended. These financial statements and financial
highlights and our report thereon are included in
the Annual Report of the Fund as filed on Form N-
30D.
We also consent to the references to our firm under
the headings "Financial Highlights" in the
Prospectus and "Auditors" in the Statement of
Additional Information.



K
PMG
LLP
New York, New York
April 17, 2000
Page
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         127,853
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,478
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,600
<INVENTORY>                                     25,467
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               197,899
<PP&E>                                          98,530
<DEPRECIATION>                                  64,354
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 247,417
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,503
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,161
<OTHER-SE>                                     194,753
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   247,417
<SALES>                                          8,051
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               347,776
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,431,472
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,237
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 566
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,084,903)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       403
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,085,306)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.14)
        




</TABLE>
Yong S. CHA, aka Edward Cha, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5781

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 15, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 6
<CIK> 0000888127
<NAME> SMITH BARNEY MUNICIPAL FUND INC
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>                       59,084,893
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>                      62,607,463
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,219,012
<ASSETS-OTHER>                                       0
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              63,878,008
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                       296,475
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                              0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>                      240,835
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                            537,310
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                                      0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>                    60,196,671
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>                        4,021,162
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>                        4,021,162
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>                      135,332
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                               0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>                              0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                     (513,875)
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>                     3,522,570
<NET-ASSETS>                                63,340,698
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                                    0
<INTEREST-INCOME>                            3,870,311
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<EXPENSES-NET>                                 522,903
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>                      3,347,408
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>                       178,170
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>                    5,732,678
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>                        9,258,256
<EQUALIZATION>                                       0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>                  (3,426,030)
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                             0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                                0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>                              0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>                          0
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                                  0
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>                               0
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>
213,954 <ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>                    0
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                              0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>
(692,045) <GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>
427,954 <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>
522,903 <AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>
61,101,954 <PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>
14.30 <PER-SHARE-NII>
0.83 <PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>
1.47 <PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                            0
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>
(0.85) <RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                          0
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>
15.75 <EXPENSE-RATIO>
0.86 <AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING>                          0
<AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE>                                 0
        


</TABLE>
# C_2018344EN.01000101.xml

| 26.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 344/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 344/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9034 — EQT Fund Management/Azelis)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 344/01)

On 21 September 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M9034. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M9034. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
GOOGLE LLC, Petitioner v. ORACLE AMERICA, INC.

No. 18-956

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 15, 2019

Motion of 78 Computer Scientists for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 619 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 619

 To elect Patrick J. Leahy, a Senator from the State of Vermont, to be 
       President pro tempore of the Senate of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 17, 2012

   Mr. Reid (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To elect Patrick J. Leahy, a Senator from the State of Vermont, to be 
       President pro tempore of the Senate of the United States.

    Resolved, That Patrick J. Leahy, a Senator from the State of 
Vermont, be, and he is hereby, elected President of the Senate pro 
tempore.
                                 <all>
```
Barton Joseph ADAMS, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES;

No. 18-9800

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for rehearing denied.
Exhibit 99.01

CONSENT OF THE LION FUND II, L.P.

Board of Directors

Biglari Holdings Inc.

17802 IH 10 West, Suite
400

San Antonio, Texas 78257



Members of the Board:

We
hereby consent to the use by Biglari Holdings Inc. of the audited financial statements of The Lion Fund II, L.P. as of and for
the periods ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 appearing in the Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 filed
by Biglari Holdings Inc. with the Securities and Exchange Commission and any amendment thereto.

| | The Lion Fund II, L.P.
| | ----------------------
| |                       
| | By:                   
| | By:                   
| |                       
| |
UNITED STATES, EX REL. Stephanie STRUBBE, et al., Petitioners, v. CRAWFORD COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, et al.

No. 19-225

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 25, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, Petitioner, v. ANDALUSIAN GLOBAL DESIGNATED ACTIVITY COMPANY, et al.

No. 18-1389

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
# C_2018093EN.01000101.xml

| 12.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8818 — Brookfield/Westinghouse)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 93/01)

On 5 March 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8818. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8818. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7013

In Re: LARRY DOTSON,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-02-6)

Submitted: October 20, 2003 Decided: November 4, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Dotson, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Larry Dotson has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus with

this court seeking to have this court direct the district court to

rule on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition and all associated

motions. The district court disposed of Dotson’s action and the

motions he filed by orders entered July 14, 2003 and September 22,

2003. Accordingly, although we grant Dotson’s motion to proceed in

forma pauperis, we deny his motion to incorporate, and deny as moot

his petition for mandamus relief. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process. 

PETITION 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 Transportation

###### National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

          - 49 CFR Parts 525 and 531
          - [NHTSA-2008-0115]

# AGENCY:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

# ACTION:

Proposed rule; withdrawal.

# SUMMARY:

NHTSA is withdrawing a proposed decision granting an exemption to Mosler Automotive (Mosler) from the industry-wide passenger car Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard for model years 2008-2010 and setting alternative standards for Mosler for those model years. Mosler did not produce any vehicles during those model years, and therefore granting the exemption would serve no useful purpose.

# DATES:

NHTSA is withdrawing the proposed rule published June 17, 2008 (73 FR 34242) as of June 13, 2022.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joseph Bayer, Engineer, Fuel Economy Division, Office of Rulemaking, by phone at (202) 366-9540 or by fax at (202) 493-2290 or Hannah Fish, Attorney Advisor, Vehicle Standards and Harmonization, Office of the Chief Counsel, by phone at (202) 366-2992 or by fax at (202) 366-3820.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

NHTSA received a petition from Mosler on June 19, 2007, seeking exemption from the passenger automobile fuel economy standards for model years (MYs) 2008 through 2010. In its petition, Mosler stated that it manufactured 15 vehicles in 2004. Mosler estimated that it would produce 40 vehicles in 2008, 50 vehicles in 2009, and 60 vehicles in 2010. NHTSA published a proposed decision establishing an alternative standard for Mosler for MYs 2008-2010 at 73 FR 34242 (June 17, 2008). NHTSA has since confirmed that Mosler did not produce any vehicles for those model years. Therefore, NHTSA is withdrawing the June 17, 2008 proposed grant of exemption and establishment of alternative standards, because granting the exemption would serve no useful purpose.

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.95.

Steven S. Cliff,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2022-12601 Filed 6-10-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

PAUL ALEXANDER GARLAND,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-453

[August 25, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; William L. Roby, Judge; L.T. Case No. 56-2020-CF-002361 

A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Benjamin Eisenberg, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, DAMOORGIAN and GERBER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I,
John J. McDonnell, Jr., certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TNS, 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(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15e and 15d-15e) for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



DATE:
August 10, 2004

|/s/JOHN J. MCDONNELL, JR.John J. McDonnell, Jr.
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | 

---
JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L.L.C., et al., Petitioners v. Rebekah GEE, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals

No. 18-1323

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 18, 2019

Motion of petitioner to file the joint appendix pursuant to Rule 33.2 with one volume under seal granted.
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC, et al., Petitioners, v. Irving H. PICARD, et al.

No. 19-277.

Supreme Court of the United States.

June 1, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 10.2



EXHIBIT 10.2





AMENDMENT NO. 2

TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


            This Amendment No. 2  (this  “Amendment’) dated as of January 1, 2004, is made by and between Vanguard Health Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
“Company”), and Charles N. Martin, Jr. (the “Executive”).


            WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive executed a certain Employment  Agreement  dated as of June 1, 1998, as amended by Amendment No. 1 dated as of May 31, 2001 ( as so amended,
the “EA”), to secure the services of the Executive as its Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer; and


            WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive wish the Executive’s base salary set forth in Section 6(a) of the EA to be increased to $990,000, effective as of January 1, 2004.


            NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants herein contained, the Company and the Executive hereby agree that the EA is amended as follows:


            1.         Defined Terms.  Except for those terms defined above, the definitions of capitalized terms used in this Amendment are as provided in
the EA.


            2.         Amendment to Section 6(a).  Section 6(a) of the EA entitled “Base Salary” is hereby deleted and replaced with the
following new Section 6(a):





                        “(a).  Base Salary.  The Executive’s base salary hereunder, from July 1, 2001 to December 31,
2003, shall be $900,000 per year, payable semi-monthly. Effective January 1, 2004, the Executive’s base salary hereunder shall be $990,000 per year, payable semi-monthly. The Board shall review such base salary at least annually and make such adjustment from
time to time as it may deem advisable, but the base salary shall not at any time be reduced from the base salary in effect from time to time.”


            3.         Ratification.  All other provisions of the EA remain unchanged and are hereby ratified by the Company and the Executive.








- 2 -





            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by  its duly authorized officer and the Executive has executed this Amendment, each as of the day and year first
set forth above.



                                                                                   
Vanguard Health Systems, Inc.



                                                                                   
By:       /s/ Ronald P. Soltman                          


                                                                                               
Ronald P. Soltman

                                                                                               
Executive Vice President



                                                                                   
Executive:



                                                                                   
/s/ Charles N. Martin, Jr.                                  

                                                                                   
Charles N. Martin, Jr.