alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010024EN.01007102.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/71 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/71

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 24 September 2009 — Rebizant, Vlandas and Vocino v Commission

(Case F-94/07) (1)

1

(Staff case - Officials - Promotion - 2006 procedure - Multiplier rate - Article 6(2) of the Staff Regulations - Article 9 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations - Promotion threshold)

2010/C 24/129

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Jean Rebizant (Karlsruhe, Germany), Georges Vlandas (Brussels, Belgium) and Vinceno Vocino (Varese, Italy) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

First, annulment of the decision not to promote the applicants to grade AD13 under the 2006 promotion procedure and, second, declaration that the decision setting the promotion thresholds applicable to officials under the “Research” and “Joint Research Centre” budgets is illegal.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 283, 24.11.2007, p. 45.

1

---
Gregory Lamar Bowman, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

March 30, 2016

ORDER

Petitioner filed a motion on May 19, 2015 for resentencing pursuant to Aiken v. Byars , 410 S.C. 534, 765 S.E.2d 572 (S.C. 2014). Now, therefore, pursuant to SC CONST. Art. V, § 4,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Honorable Eugene C. Griffith, Jr. be vested with exclusive jurisdiction over the Petitioner's Motion for Resentencing in the above-captioned matter.

Judge Griffith shall at all times be vested with concurrent jurisdiction in all circuits of the state to dispose of matters relating to this case, and shall decide all matters pertaining to the Petitioner's Motion, and shall retain jurisdiction over this matter regardless of where he may be assigned to hold court, and may schedule such hearings as may be necessary at any time without regard as to whether there is a term of court scheduled.

If necessary, to resolve issues related to the appointment of counsel, a hearing shall be conducted within thirty (30) days of this order.

Within sixty (60) days of the date of this order, Judge Griffith shall issue a scheduling order setting forth the schedule that shall be followed in this matter, including the date of the hearing on the merits. The scheduling order may be amended as necessary.

s/Costa M. Pleicones

Costa M. Pleicones

Chief Justice
Exhibit 10.2

 



 

July 7, 2014

 

By Hand
  Joseph C. Radziewicz

 

Re:   Amendment of Retention Bonus Letter Agreement

 

Dear Joe:

 

As you know, we have provided you with an opportunity to earn a retention bonus pursuant to that certain letter agreement dated July 18, 2013 (the “Existing Letter Agreement”).  Capitalized terms used herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Existing Letter Agreement.

 

As we continue evaluating strategic alternatives, we are pleased to extend the Outside Date of your Existing Letter Agreement from June 30, 2014 to December 31, 2014.  As a result, you will be entitled to receive the Retention Bonus if a Closing occurs by December 31, 2014 so long as you remain employed by the Company on the date of Closing; provided however, in the event of a Covered Termination, you shall also be entitled to receive the Retention Bonus as if you were employed on such date.  But, please note that since none of the Quarterly Financial Targets were achieved, you are not due any Retention Bonus based upon the Company’s financial performance.

 

In addition, please note that the Existing Letter Agreement is hereby further amended so that you are not eligible for a Retention Bonus in the event that the stockholders of the Company approve a plan of complete liquidation or dissolution.  Accordingly, the following words, “the stockholders of the Company approve a plan of complete liquidation or dissolution of the Company or” are hereby deleted from subsection (iv) of the definition of Change in Control.

 

Except as set forth above, the Existing Letter Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. We look forward to your continued employment with us.

 

	
 
    	
Very truly yours,
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/ Robert S. Yorgensen
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Name: Robert S. Yorgensen
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Title: President and CEO
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Agreed to and accepted:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/Joseph   Radziewicz
    	
 
    
	
Joseph C.   Radziewicz
**Exhibit 31.2****UNIVERSAL BIOSENSORS, INC.****CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**I, Salesh Balak, Chief Financial Officer of Universal Biosensors, Inc., certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Universal Biosensors, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and proceduresto be designed under oursupervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating tothe registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during theperiod in which this report isbeing prepared;  b) Not applicable;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation;and  d) Disclosed in this report any changein the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reportingthat occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likelyto materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the designor operation of internal controlover financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or otheremployees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.Date:April 30, 2008             /s/ Salesh Balak   Salesh Balak   Chief Financial OfficerUniversal Biosensors, Inc.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 40747 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
MAURILIO PACHECO

- ALANIS , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:16

- CR

- 37

- 1

Before JOLLY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Maurilio Pacheco

Alanis has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Pacheco

- Alanis h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 21, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-40747 Document: 00513883324 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/21/2017No. 16

- 40747

2 issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 16-40747 Document: 00513883324 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/21/2017
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-30621 USDC No. 97-CV-496

EDWARD E. BLAKE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus WILLIAMS, Lieutenant, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

- - - - - - - - - - March 3, 1999 Before REAVLEY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Edward E. Blake, Louisiana prisoner # 305934, seeks to appeal the district court’s dismissal on March 19, 1998, of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action. This court has a duty, sua sponte , to determine whether it has appellate jurisdiction. Mosley v. Cozby , 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). Blake’s notice of appeal filed on June 17, 1998, was not filed within 30 days of the date of entry of the district court’s final judgment and is too late. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). We DISMISS this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
<PAGE>   1




                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2







<PAGE>   2



REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS-UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM


To the Board of Directors of
IMC Mortgage Company and Subsidiaries


We have examined the assertion by IMC Mortgage Company and Subsidiaries'
management about compliance with the minimum servicing standards identified in
the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program
for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of and for the year ended December 31, 1997
included in the accompanying management assertion. Management is responsible for
IMC Mortgage Company and Subsidiaries' compliance with those minimum servicing
standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion
about the entity's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accounts and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about IMC Mortgage Company and
Subsidiaries' compliance with the minimum servicing standards and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
examination does not provide a legal determination on IMC Mortgage Company and
Subsidiaries' compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that IMC Mortgage Company and
Subsidiaries complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of
and for the year ended December 31, 1997 is fairly stated, in all material
respects.



                                         /S/ COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.



Tampa, Florida
February 20, 1998





<PAGE>   3

                      [IMC MORTGAGE COMPANY LETTERHEAD]


March 23, 1998


Coopers & Lybrand
101 East Kennedy Blvd. Suite 1500
Tampa, FL  33602



As of and for the year ended December 31, 1997, IMC Mortgage Company and
Subsidiaries has compiled in all material respects with minimum servicing
standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform
Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers. For the period January 1 to
June 30, 1997, IMC Mortgage Company and Subsidiaries had in effect a fidelity
bond policy in the amount of $4,000,000. As of and for the six months ended
December 31, 1997, IMC Mortgage Company and Subsidiaries had in effect a
fidelity bond policy in the amount of $8,000,000. As of and for the year ended
December 31, 1997, IMC Mortgage Company and Subsidiaries had in effect an errors
and omissions policy in the amount of $2,000,000.




                                      /s/ Stuart D. Marvin
                                      -----------------------------------------
                                      Stuart D. Marvin, Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
FPA Medical Management, Inc. on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-3760 and 333-2007) and
on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-00076, 333-16741 and 333-15755) of our report dated
March 15, 1996, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of
Sterling Healthcare Group, Inc. as of December 31, 1995, and for the year ended
December 31, 1995 and for the period from June 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994,
which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


/s/ COOPERS & LYBRAND LLP

Miami, Florida
March 28, 1997
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 180 (Monday, September 19, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54954]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18554]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1605-DR]


Alabama; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and 
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Alabama (FEMA-1605-DR), dated August 29, 2005, and 
related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 10, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Alabama is hereby amended to include the following 
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by 
the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of August 29, 2005:

    Bibb, Colbert, Cullman, Lamar, Lauderdale, Marion, Monroe, 
Perry, Wilcox, and Winston Counties for Public Assistance.

    Greene and Pickens Counties for Public Assistance (already 
designated for Individual Assistance.)

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management 
Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, 
Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 
Individuals and Households Program-Other Needs, 97.036, Public 
Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

Michael D. Brown,
Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of 
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 05-18554 Filed 9-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
STATE of North Carolina v. Jimmy Dean BLACK.

No. COA15-107.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Oct. 6, 2015.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

No error in part; dismissed in part.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

SEPT 19, 2008

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 07-13245

 

D. C. Docket No. 90-00001 CR-06-2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL D. TAYLOR, 

a.k.a. Robert T. Alexander,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

 

(September 19, 2008)

Before DUBINA, HULL and FAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
Taylor’s motion to take judicial notice is granted. 1

2

Appellant Michael Taylor, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s

revocation of supervised release, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), and the denial

of his pro se motion to dismiss a petition for revocation of supervised release.

After reviewing the record, reading the parties’ briefs, and having the

benefit of oral argument, we conclude that the district court properly held that

because Taylor invited any alleged error, he was precluded from asserting his

claim. United States v. Love, 449 F.3d 1154, 1157 (11th Cir. 2006).

Because we see no merit to any of the arguments Taylor makes in this

appeal, we affirm the district court’s order denying Taylor’s motion to dismiss and

the revocation of Taylor’s term of supervised release.1

AFFIRMED.
# C_2008171EN.01003003.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/30

---

Order of the President of the Third Chamber of the Court of 28 January 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Kammarrätten i Jönköping, Sweden) — Mattias Jalkhed v Jordbruksverket

(Case C-18/07) (1)

1

(2008/C 171/50)

Language of the case: Swedish

Language of the case: Swedish

The President of the Third Chamber of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 56, 10.3.2007.

1

---
HANESBRANDS INC. v. Kathleen FOWLER.

No. 438A15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Jan. 12, 2016.

David C. Pishko, Winston-Salem, for Fowler, Kathleen.

Robin E. Shea, Winston-Salem, for Hanesbrands Inc.

Jill S. Stricklin, Winston-Salem, for Hanesbrands Inc.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 12th of January 2016 by Defendant:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th of January 2016."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 19th day of February 2016 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
THE ASSURANCE GROUP, INC. v. Samuel Allen BARE and Deborah Lynn Bare, Marcheta Perry Sawyer, Timothy Mark Byrd, Gregory Todd Byrd, James Chandler Beck, Michael Wayne Anderson, Jeffrey A. Heybrock, Charles Bernard Moore, Jr.

No. 67P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 22, 2016

Wm. Kennerly Burger, Attorney at Law, James Hawes, Attorney at Law, For Bare, Samuel Allen, et al.

Christopher Charles Finan, Attorney at Law, High Point, A.L. Anderson, Attorney at Law, For The Assurance Group, Inc.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 2nd of March 2016 by Defendants in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."
**Exhibit      32**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| Dated:                February 14, 2008 | /s/                Kenneth Plotkin                                             |
|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                    | Kenneth                Plotkin                                                 |
|                                    | Chief                Executive Officer                                         |
|                                    |                                                                           |
|                                    | /s/                Gerald Tucciarone                                           |
|                                    | Gerald                Tucciarone                                               |
|                                    | Chief                Financial Officer, Treasurer and                Secretary |

----
Paul L. Erickson v. Clayton Siegel, DC, individually and on behalf of the other named defendants identified in Exhibit A to the Plaintiff's Complaint

No. 111P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 9, 2016

Paul Erickson, Attorney at Law, Asheville, For Erickson, Paul L.

Dale A. Curriden, Attorney at Law, Asheville, For Siegel, Clayton (DC).

Emma J. Hodson, Attorney at Law, Asheville.

*380**ORDER**

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 29th of March 2016 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of June 2016."
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1610

In Re: SAMUEL TIJUAN JONES, a/k/a Tito,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(6:06-cr-00398-HFF-1)

Submitted: September 11, 2008 Decided: September 15, 2008

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel Tijuan Jones, Petitioner Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
 2 

PER CURIAM:

Samuel Tijuan Jones petitions for a writ of mandamus,

alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his motion

seeking reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)

(2000). He seeks an order from this court directing the district

court to act. We find there has been no undue delay in the

district court. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in

forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition. 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
State of North Carolina v. Roger Christopher Oxendine

No. 161P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 9, 2016

John R. Mills, Attorney at Law, For Oxendine, Roger Christopher.

Mariana Molina DeWeese, Assistant Attorney General, Trey Robison, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina.

**ORDER**

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of May 2016 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of June 2016."