alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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. 07-50416

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ HERNANDEZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:06-CR-660-2

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Alberto Rodriguez Hernandez

(Rodriguez) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Rodriguez has filed a response.

Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Rodriguez’s response

discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Rodriguez’s

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 22, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-50416

2

motion for the appointment of new counsel and his motion for an order that

current counsel proceed with the appeal are DENIED.
**CERTIFICATION      OF **

**DIRECTOR      **

**AND      **

**PRESIDENT      **

**PURSUANT      TO **

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

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO **

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

|   | (i)                      | the                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Corporation for the nine months                ended September 30, 2005 (the “Quarterly Report”) fully complies with the                requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange                Act of                1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|   | (ii)                     | the                information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of                the Corporation.                                                                                              |

|   | By:     | */s/                Ivan Bebek*  |
|--------|--------------|---------------------------------------|
|   | Name:   | Ivan                Bebek        |
|   | Title:  | President,                Director    |
|   |         |                                  |
|   | Date:   | November                7, 2005  |

*This      written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission      as an exhibit to the Corporation’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB. A signed      original of this statement has been provided to the Corporation and will be      retained by the Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange      Commission or its staff upon request.*

*This      certification accompanies this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB pursuant to      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the      extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Corporation for purposes      of      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange      Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference      into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange      Act, except to the extent that the Corporation specifically incorporates it      by      reference. *
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1871

SAMWEIL MAZOUZ BASLIOUS SAADALLA,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. 

Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: September 2, 2008

Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Adedayo O. Idowu, IDOWU & ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring, Maryland, for

Petitioner. Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney

General, Shelley R. Goad, Senior Litigation Counsel, Katharine E.

Clark, Trial Attorney, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,

D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Samweil Mazouz Baslious Saadalla, a native and citizen of

Egypt, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings

based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have

reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s order and find

that the Board did not abuse its discretion. See INS v. Doherty,

502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for

review. 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. Marian Olivia Curtis

No. COA16-458

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 6, 2016

AFFIRMED.
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-364-CR

MANUEL R. MURILLO	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM THE 297TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellant Manuel R. Murillo entered an open plea of guilty to two counts of indecency with a child by contact and elected to have the jury assess punishment.  The jury assessed punishment at two years’ confinement on the first count and four years’ community supervision on the second count.  The trial court sentenced Murillo in accordance with the jury’s verdict. 

	Murillo’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion.  Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California2 by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.  Murillo was given the opportunity to file a pro se brief, but he did not do so.

	As the reviewing court, we must conduct an independent evaluation of the record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining that the appeal is frivolous.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.).  Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.  See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).  Because Murillo entered an open plea of guilty, our independent review for potential error is limited to potential jurisdictional defects, the voluntariness of Murillo’s plea, error that is not independent of and supports the judgment of guilt, and error occurring after entry of the guilty plea.  See Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); Young v. State, 8 S.W.3d 656, 666–67 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).

	We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief.  We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); accord Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).  We therefore grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

								SUE WALKER

								JUSTICE

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, HOLMAN, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: October 16, 2008
LOCKLEAR v. CUMMINGS, et al.

202A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 30, 2017

Walter L. Hart, IV, Attorney at Law, for Locklear, Marjorie C.

David D. Ward, Attorney at Law, Jaye E. Bingham-Hinch, Attorney at Law, Katherine Hilkey-Boyatt, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Cummings, Matthew S. (M.D.), et al.

Robert A. Ford, Attorney at Law, Demetrius Worley Berry, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Southeastern Regional Medical Center.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th of June 2017 by Bingham Hinch to Withdraw as Counsel:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of June 2017."
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**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 amended Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation
      (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending October 31, 2006, as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report"), I, Shaun Toker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, to my knowledge 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 result of operations of the Company.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Triangle Petroleum Corporation and will be retained by Triangle Petroleum
      Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff
      upon request.





/s/
                SHAUN TOKERShaun
                TokerChief
                Financial OfficerMarch
                6, 2008
STATE of North Carolina v. Jose Daniel GONZALEZ, Defendant.

No. COA16-1325

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 20, 2017

NO ERROR.
STATE of North Carolina, v. Raymond Lamont BAILEY, Defendant.

No. COA16-962

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 18, 2017

NO ERROR.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3898 

To prohibit students who have been convicted of a criminal hazing offense 

under State law from receiving assistance under title IV of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 16, 2014 

Mr. GRAYSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To prohibit students who have been convicted of a criminal 

hazing offense under State law from receiving assistance 

under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LOSS OF ELIGIBILITY FOR HAZING CRIME CON4 VICTION. 

5 Section 484 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 

6 U.S.C. 1091) is amended by adding at the end the fol7 lowing: 

8 ‘‘(u) LOSS OF ELIGIBILITY FOR HAZING CRIME CON9 VICTION.—No student who is convicted of a criminal hazVerDate Mar 15 2010 03:00 Jan 23, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3898.IH H3898

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3898 IH

1 ing offense under State law shall be eligible to receive any 

2 grant, loan, or work assistance under this title.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
a50911397ex10_2.htm


Exhibit 10.2


 


 



First Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement


 


1.           This first amendment (the “First Amendment”) is made by B/E Aerospace, Inc. (the “Company”) and Amin J. Khoury (“Executive”), parties to that certain Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated July 29, 2013 (the “Agreement”).


 


2.           The Agreement is amended as follows:


 


In the first sentence of Section 7.1.1 of the Agreement the phrase “(i) for purposes of Section 7.4, and following the occurrence of a Change of Control (as defined below), the date of the Change of Control, or (ii)” shall be inserted between the words “mean” and “the”; and


 


the word “other” shall be inserted between the words “any” and “reason”.


 


3.           Except as set forth in this First Amendment, the Agreement is unaffected and shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with its terms, and any previous amendments thereto. If there is conflict between this First Amendment and the Agreement or any earlier amendment, the terms of this First Amendment will prevail.


 


[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]


 




  





  











  






 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First Amendment as of the date written below.


 










	
 

	
EXECUTIVE


	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	/s/ Amin J. Khoury	 
	 	Amin J. Khoury 
	 	 
	 	Dated: 	May 12, 2014	 









 


 


 






	
 

	
B/E Aerospace, Inc.


	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	/s/ Ryan M. Patch	 
	 	

Ryan M. Patch


	 	

Vice President, Corporate Secretary and General Counsel


	 	 
	 	Dated: 	May 12, 2014	 









 


 


- 2 -
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





Each of the undersigned, in his capacity as an officer of La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company (the "Registrant"), hereby certifies, for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





|  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | the Amendment No.1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018 (the “Report), which accompanies this certification, 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 of the Registrant at the end of such quarter and the results of operations of the Registrant for such quarter.







Date:April 30, 2019/s/ George TidmarshGeorge Tidmarsh, M.D., Ph.D.President, Chief Executive Officer and Secretary/s/ Dennis MulroyDennis MulroyChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)








Note: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company and will be retained by La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

Under the authority granted to me as Chief Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service by the General Counsel of the Department of the Treasury by General Counsel Order No. 21 (Rev. 4), pursuant to the Civil Service Reform Act, I have appointed the following persons to the Legal Division Performance Review Board, Internal Revenue Service Panel: 

1. Chairperson, James Carroll, Deputy General Counsel 

2. Deborah N. Nolan, Commissioner, Large and Midsize Business 

3. Eric Solomon, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Regulatory Affairs 

This publication is required by 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4). 

Dated: September 13, 2005. 

Donald L. Korb, 

Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service. 

[FR Doc. 05-18802 Filed 9-20-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
MEMORANDUM OPINION 

No. 04-08-00722-CV 

Leobardo REYES, 

Appellant 

v. 

Courtney DEVLIN and Raymond Devlin, 

Appellees 

From the County Court at Law No. 5, Bexar County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 322350 

David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding 

PER CURIAM 

Sitting: Alma L. López, Chief Justice 

 Rebecca Simmons, Justice 

 Steven C. Hilbig, Justice 

Delivered and Filed: October 15, 2008 

DISMISSED 

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion contains a certificate of 

service to appellee, who has not opposed the motion. We, therefore, grant the motion and 

dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 

PER CURIAM
State v. Timothy Wiley, Jr.

201P16-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2017.

Ms. Amy Kunstling Irene, Special Deputy Attorney General, Mr. Michael Bonfoey, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina.

Mr. Timothy Wiley, Jr., Pro Se.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th of October 2016 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th of January 2017."
----

Corrigendum to the Commission Communication in the framework of the implementation of Council Directive 90/396/EEC of 29 June 1990 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to appliances burning gaseous fuels

(Official Journal of the European Union C 49 of 28 February 2006)

(2006/C 97/04)

Page 5:

Replace:

with:

----
STARK, et. al. v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY.

No. 313PA10-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 10, 2011.

K. Edward Greene, Raleigh, for Stark, Cheyenne Saleena et. al.

Christopher R. Kiger, Raleigh.

Sandra Giannone Ezell.

Tobias S. Hampson, Raleigh.

Richard J. Keshian, Winston-Salem.

Richard D. Dietz, Raleigh.

Stephen J. Darmody, Miami, for National Association of Manufacturers, et al.

Andrew H. Erteschik, Raleigh, for NC Assoc. of Defense Attorneys and NC Chamber.

Burley B. Mitchell, Jr., Raleigh, for Product Liability Advisory Council.

William F. Womble, Jr., Winston-Salem, for Product Liability Advisory Council.

James R. Morgan, Jr., Winston-Salem.

John Edward Pueschel, Winston-Salem.

Steven B. Epstein, Raleigh, for N.C. Association of Defense Attorneys and the N.C. Chamber.

Hugh F. Young, Jr., for Product Liability Advisory Council.

Dan J. McLamb, Raleigh, for National Assoc. of Manufacturers, et. al.

I. Beverly Lake, Jr., Raleigh, for Former N.C. Legislators H. Parks Helms, et. al.

Kirk G. Warner, Raleigh, for Ford Motor Company.

Robert L. Wise, for Ford Motor Company.

Adam Charnes, Winston-Salem, for Ford Motor Company.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 3rd of August 2010 by the National Association of Manufacturers, Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, American Tort Reform Association, *190and Property Casualty Insurers Association of America to Admit Cary Silverman Pro Hac Vice:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 10th of March 2011."
NO. 07-08-0362-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

OCTOBER 9, 2008

______________________________

In the Interest of A.J.B. and A.K.B., Children

______________________________

FROM THE 237th DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 93-543,112; HON. SAM MEDINA, PRESIDING

_______________________________

ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant Mark David Bural appeals from the termination of his parental rights to his

minor children A.J.B. and A.K.B. On September 25, 2008, the clerk’s record was filed.

The reporter’s record was due on September 23, 2008. No extension motion or record was

filed. On September 30, 2008, this court directed the court reporter by letter “to advise the

Court of the status of the reporter’s record on or before October 10, 2007." In response,

the court received an audio version of the hearing without a transcribed copy.

Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the 237th District Court

of Lubbock County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall

immediately cause notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to

determine the following:
2

1. if there is a reporter’s record that can be transcribed in written form and,

if so;

2. when the reporter’s record can reasonably be transcribed into written form

and filed in a manner that does not further delay the prosecution of this

appeal or have the practical effect of depriving the appellant of his right to

appeal.

The trial court shall cause the hearing to be transcribed. So too shall it 1) execute

findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the foregoing issues, 2) cause to be

developed a supplemental clerk’s record containing its findings of fact and conclusions of

law and all orders it may issue as a result of its hearing in this matter, and 3) cause to be

developed a reporter’s record transcribing the evidence and arguments presented at the

aforementioned hearing, if any. Additionally, the district court shall then file the

supplemental clerk’s and reporter’s records transcribing the hearing with the clerk of this

court on or before October 24, 2008. Should further time be needed by the trial court to

perform these tasks, then same must be requested before October 24, 2008.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.