alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Andre Demosthene, Appellant.

[798 NYS2d 918]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), rendered November 22, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

When the defendant entered his plea of guilty, the County Court warned him that he would not be afforded youthful offender treatment. At sentencing, when the court did not adjudicate him a youthful offender, the defendant did not move to withdraw his plea' or otherwise object to the sentence. *385Consequently, his contention that the court should have granted him youthful offender treatment is unpreserved for appellate review *(see People v*Fryer, 2 AD3d 874 [2003]; *People v Noboa,*280 AD2d 558 [2001]). In any event, under the circumstances of this case, the County Court’s determination not to afford the defendant youthful offender treatment was a provident exercise of discretion *(see People v Greene,*13 AD3d 647 [2004], *lv denied*4 NY3d 763 [2005]; *People v Taylor,*302 AD2d 480, 481 [2003]; *People v Wallace,*246 AD2d 676 [1998]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]), and, in any event, the defendant has no basis to complain inasmuch as the sentence was part of the negotiated plea agreement *(see People v Fanelli,*8 AD3d 296 [2004]). Florio, J.P., Krausman, Crane, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

#### ** **

**CERTIFICATIONS OFPERIODIC REPORT**

 

I, James A. Bowman, President and Chief Executive Officer of EncisionInc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

•                  the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period ended December31, 2002 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

•                  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

Dated:  February 14, 2003

 
|   | /s/ James A. Bowman                                    |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                                   |
|   | James A. Bowman  President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

I, Marcia McHaffie, Controller and Principal Accounting Officer ofEncision Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of myknowledge:

 

•                  the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period ended December31, 2002 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

•                  the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:  February 14, 2003.

 
|   | /s/ Marcia McHaffie                                          |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                                         |
|   | Marcia McHaffie  Controller and Principal Accounting Officer |

 

----
----

| 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,                the                financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: January                14, 2008 | By: | /s/                Joseph J. Raymond                 |  |
|---------------------------------------------|-----|------------------------------------------------------|--|
|                                             |     | Joseph                J. Raymond                     |
|                                             |     | Chairman                of the Board of Directors,   |
|                                             |     | President                and Chief Executive Officer |

----
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3498 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to extend the exemption from the 

fire-retardant materials construction requirement for vessels operating 

within the Boundary Line. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2008 

Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. BROWN, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. 

VITTER, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. BAYH, and Mr. LUGAR) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to extend the exemption from the fire-retardant materials construction requirement for vessels operating within the Boundary 

Line. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF EXEMPTION. 

4 Section 3503(a) of title 46, United States Code, is 

5 amended by striking ‘‘2008’’ and inserting ‘‘2018’’. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Humphreys, Beales and Retired Judge Fitzpatrick* 

BERNARD L. DINICOLA, JR. 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* *

v. Record No. 2726-07-4 PER CURIAM 

JULY 22, 2008 

TARGET CORPORATION 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Bernard L. DiNicola, Jr., pro se, on briefs). 

 (Joseph F. Giordano; Anne-Marie K. Zell; Semmes, Bowen & 

Semmes, on brief), for appellee. 

 Bernard L. DiNicola, Jr. (claimant) appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation 

Commission finding that (1) he failed to prove he was disabled from work as a result of his 

compensable October 15, 2004 injury by accident; (2) he failed to prove he sustained an injury 

by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on December 9, 2005; and (3) the 

deputy commissioner did not err in failing to strike Target’s defenses.1

 We have reviewed the 

record and the commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we 

affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See DiNicola v. Target, 

VWC File Nos. 226-72-33 & 226-81-77 (Oct. 11, 2007). We dispense with oral argument and 

 *

 Judge Fitzpatrick took part in the consideration of this case prior to the effective date of 

her retirement as senior judge on July 1, 2008 and thereafter by designation pursuant to Code 

§ 17.1-400(D). 

** Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 

1

 Claimant’s opening brief does not contain any questions presented. Claimant filed a 

document entitled “Questions to be answered in support of opening brief,” which includes 

forty-three questions. In rendering our decision, we have considered only those issues 

considered by the commission and preserved for appeal. 
- 2 - 

summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code 

§ 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

Affirmed.
# CE2004078EN.01000802.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/8

---

(2004/C 78 E/0008)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3645/02

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 December 2002)

Subject:   Imprisonment of Shakir

Subject:

Is the Commission aware of the case of Adly Shakir, a Coptic Christian from Beni Suef Egypt, who according to human rights organisations is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence after being falsely convicted of the murders of most of his immediate family in a 1997 case? Is it the Commission's opinion that the way Shakir's case has been handled is in accordance with Article 2 of the Egypt-EU Association Agreement?

What representations does it intend to make on Shakir's behalf to the Egyptian authorities?

---
EXHIBIT 10.2


 


ENDORSEMENT
TO 10% SENIOR SECURED CONVERTIBLE NOTE


 


Precision
Optics Corporation, Inc.

New York, New York

November 15, 2010


 


The 10%
Senior Secured Convertible Note dated June 25, 2008 and amended
December 11, 2008, June 25, 2010 and July 26, 2010, September
15, 2010 and October 15, 2010 (the “Note”) of Precision Optics
Corporation, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”),
payable to the order of Special Situations Private Equity Fund, L.P. (the
“Holder”) in an aggregate principal amount of $275,000 and to which the
Endorsement is affixed is hereby amended in the following respects:


 


1.                                       The term “Stated
Maturity Date” is hereby restated to be “November 30, 2010.”


 


2.                                       Except as
expressly amended by this Endorsement, the Note remains in full force and
effect and the Company hereby reconfirms its obligations thereunder.


 


IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Endorsement to be duly executed, and the
Holder has caused this Endorsement to be duly accepted, by their respective
duly authorized representatives as of the day and year first above written.


 


 


	
   

  	
  PRECISION OPTICS CORPORATION, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By

  	
  /s/ Richard E. Forkey

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name: Richard E. Forkey

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title: Chief Executive Officer

  



 


	
  Accepted:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  SPECIAL SITUATIONS PRIVATE EQUITY FUND, L.P.

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Adam Stettner

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name: Adam Stettner

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title: General Partner
GREENWALD v. SUGARLOAF PROPERTIES, LLC

No. SO8A0164.

No. SO8X0165.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

January 24, 2008.

Judgment affirmed without opinion.
# CE2004078EN.01002801.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/28

---

(2004/C 78 E/0030)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1309/03

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 April 2003)

Subject:   Human rights abuses in Laos

Subject:

The Commission will be aware of the human rights abuses, notably the treatment of Christians, which continue in Laos.

Has the Commission:

| 1. | made representations to the Laotian Government? |
| --- | --- |

1.

made representations to the Laotian Government?

| 2. | other plans, to try to improve the situation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

other plans, to try to improve the situation?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2003)

(8 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of reports that freedom of religious expression remains restricted in Laos, including reports of members of Christian groups being persecuted and/or detained on grounds of their religious affiliation.

This is done despite the fact that the Constitution stipulates ‘the right and freedom to believe or not to believe in religion’. The level of tolerance of religious practice varies between regions. There have been reports of arrest and detention of religious believers and their spiritual leaders without charges. Some Christians have been sentenced for gathering ‘to create social turmoil’. Some reports also mention difficulties for religious groups seeking to establish new places of worship in particular provinces. In other parts of the country both Catholic and Protestant followers are able to worship openly.

The Commission follows this and other matters relating to human rights in Laos closely and concerns are frequently raised in bilateral meetings between the Community and Laos. The Commission also participates fully in all Union démarches to convey our concerns to the Laotian authorities.

The Commission is fully committed to emphasising the need to strengthen respect for civil and political rights in Laos, including freedom of expression, assembly, association and religion. During this spring, the Commission will be opening a Delegation in Vientiane, Laos. This will increase opportunities to engage in a more profound and constructive dialogue on human rights issues with the Lao Government.

---
# CE2004088EN.01028901.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/289 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/289

---

(2004/C 88 E/0295)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1776/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 June 2002)

Subject:   Discrimination against visually impaired people

Subject:

An EU-financed pilot project in Ireland, England and Sweden empowered visually impaired people to campaign for change around minimum changes to improve life for people with such a disability. These include the installation of audio signals at all road crossings, removal of obstructions on streets and other public places, improved transport facilities, social outlets, etc.

In view of the fact that 2003 is the European Year of Disability, what does the Commission propose to do to address this de facto discrimination against visually impaired people?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(15 July 2002)

(15 July 2002)

In the Commission's Communication ‘Towards a barrier-free Europe for people with disabilities’ (1), the Commission confirms its commitment to establish a work group which will be tasked to identify appropriate measures in order to improve the build environment for all people with disabilities. This will include people with visual impairments.

1

The composition and management arrangements for this group are currently being examined. It is intended that this group shall start its tasks this year in order to complete these during 2003, European Year of People with Disabilities.

A number of different services in the Commission will participate in the work of this group. Representatives of disability organisations, as well as the different sectors of industry and experts in these matters will also be closely associated with this work.

---

(1)  COM(2000)284.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM PL
BRANDS, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED
OCTOBER 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               APR-30-2001
<PERIOD-END>                    OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                          1,667,460
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   24,070
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                1,692,403
<PP&E>                          44,934
<DEPRECIATION>                  2,150
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  4,401,409
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           139,345
<BONDS>                         0
<COMMON>                        16,899
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<OTHER-SE>                      7,564,973
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    4,262,064
<SALES>                         18,430
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                18,430
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                1,148,062
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (1,100,318)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (1,100,318)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (1,100,318)
<EPS-BASIC>                   (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (.08)



</TABLE>
----

(2004/C 33 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0852/03

by Christos Folias (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 March 2003)

Subject:   Public supply contracts

Article 7(2) of Greek law 2955/2002 authorises the supply of products in the absence of estimates regarding annual requirements or procedures for the awarding of contracts. It does not provide for any means of establishing which product is the most suitable for patients and allows prices to be set arbitrarily at the highest level thereby limiting competition. Similarly Joint Ministerial Decision DG6a/GP/73754/24-7-7-02(Official Gazette 984/31/7-02) implementing the above law is not based on any technical specifications, observing that no comparison is possible as, more specifically, that entire categories of products cannot be compared with each other, on the principle that, by definition, all manufacturers produce items which cannot be compared with those produced by any other manufacturer. It also fails to stipulate procedures for the according of public supply contracts or require estimation of annual requirements to be drawn up specifying either exact content or quality, leaving matters to the discretion of the body concerned.

Is Greek Law 2955/2002, together with the Ministerial Decision implementing it, in accordance with EU legislation in this field and more specifically Directive 93/36/EEC (1). If not, what measures will the Commission take to ensure that Greece fully complies with the directive and when?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2003)

The Commission has in fact obtained Greek law No 2955/2001, and the Ministerial Decision implementing that law (2). After an initial examination, it appears that these provisions might not comply with the requirements of Directive 93/36/EEC (3).

The Commission has just received a complaint about the same matter, which seems to give a more comprehensive description of the way in which the Greek legislation applies to hospital supplies.

The Commission will examine the bulky documents it has received on this matter and, in dealing with this complaint, will contact the Greek authorities to obtain their point of view both on the allegations made by the complainant and on the Commission's analysis of this case.

----

(1)OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

(2)  DY6a/GP/73754/24-7-02/FEK 984/31-7-02.

(3)  Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts, OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

----
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Frank and Clements 

NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND 

 DRY DOCK COMPANY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 

v. Record No. 0505-04-1 PER CURIAM 

 JUNE 22, 2004 

JAMES J. PRESTON 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Benjamin M. Mason; Mason, Mason, Walker & Hedrick, P.C., on 

brief), for appellant. 

 (John E. Robins, Jr.; Stephen F. Forbes; Forbes & Broadwell, on 

brief), for appellee. 

 Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company (employer) appeals a decision of 

the Workers’ Compensation Commission awarding temporary total disability benefits, temporary 

partial disability benefits, and medical benefits to James J. Preston (claimant), and finding that 

(1) claimant was entitled to a de facto award, and therefore had no duty to market his residual 

work capacity; (2) claimant did not unjustifiably refuse vocational rehabilitation efforts; and 

(3) he did not unjustifiably refuse selective employment. We have reviewed the record and the 

commission’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the commission in its final opinion. See Preston v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock 

Company, VWC File No. 210-67-33 (Feb. 3, 2004).1 We dispense with oral argument and 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 

1

 We note that employer argues that the commission erred in awarding claimant 

temporary total disability benefits from September 3, 2002 through October 6, 2002, because the 

evidence proved that he was taking class at the Apprentice School during that period and was 

being paid for his work. Thus, employer contends that claimant was entitled to, at most, 
 - 2- 

summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code 

§ 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

Affirmed.

 

temporary partial disability benefits during that period of time. Employer did not raise this 

argument before the commission. Therefore, we will not consider it for the first time on appeal. 

See Rule 5A:18.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
              INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT AND REPORT ON SCHEDULE
 
PetroFina S.A.
 
We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement of
PetroFina S.A. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-61145) of our report dated March 23,
1999, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of PetroFina S.A. for the year
ended December 31, 1998.
 
/s/ MICHEL DENAYER
Michel Denayer
Statutory Auditor
DELOITTE & TOUCHE
Reviseurs d'Entreprises s.c.c.
 
Brussels, Belgium
 
March 23, 1999
STATE v. BAILEY.

No. COA07-989.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 3, 2008.

Certification Date June 23, 2008.

Appeal from Cabarrus (05CRS53959, 05CRS15362).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. No error.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18. U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



     The undersigned  executive  officers of the Registrant  hereby certify that
this  Annual  Report  on Form  10-KSB  for the year  ended  June 30,  2002  (the
"Report") fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,  and the  information  contained in the Report
fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition and results
of operations of the Registrant.



                               By:/s/ Larry D. Smith
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Name:    Larry D. Smith
                                  Title:   President and Chief Executive Officer



                               By:/s/ Frank L. DeLay
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Name:    Frank L. DeLay
                                  Title:   Chief Financial Officer

Date: September 24, 2002