alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed November 24, 2014.

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 1 3 - 0 1571 - CR No. 05 - 13 - 01572 - CR RAY ANTHONY MYERS , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial Distri ct Cour t Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F 13 - 56192 - W, F13 - 56193 - W 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices FitzGerald, Lang, and Brown Opinion b y Justice Lang Ray Anthony Myers waived a jury and pleaded guilty to felony DWI and possession of cocaine in a n amount of one gram or more but less than four grams. See T EX . P ENAL C ODE A NN . § § 49.04(a), 49.09(b)(2) (West Supp. 2014 ); T EX . H EALTH & S AFETY C ODE A NN . § 481.115(a), (c) (West 2010)
. After finding appellant guilty, t he trial court assessed punishment at seven years’ imprisonment on the felony DWI case and three years’ imprisonment on the cocaine case . On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which s he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requiremen ts of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect,- 2
- there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811

– 12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). C ounsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

– 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate cour ts and counsel in Anders cases). We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief
. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 82 6

– 2 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases)
. We agree the appeals are frivolous and without mer it. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal s . We affirm the trial court’s judgment s .

/ Douglas S. Lang/ DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE Do Not Publish T EX . R. A PP . P. 47 131571F.U05- 3
- 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at D allas** 
JUDGMENT
RAY ANTHONY MYERS , Appellant No. 05

- 1 3

- 01571

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F13

- 56192

- W ). Opinion delivered by Justice Lang , Justices FitzG erald and Brown participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED
. Judgment entered the 24th day of November, 2014.- 4
- 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
JUDGMENT
RAY ANTHONY MYERS , Appellant No. 05

- 1 3

- 01572

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F13

- 56193

- W ). Opinion delivered by Justice Lang , Justices FitzGerald and Brown participating.

Ba sed on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED
. Judgment entered 24th day of November, 2014.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 26, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20999]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Performance Review Board

    As required by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-
454), Chairman Kevin J. Martin appointed the following executives to 
the Performance Review Board (PRB): Michelle Carey, Thomas Navin, and 
Monica Desai.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-20999 Filed 10-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Motion to wi thdraw denied and Order filed March 10 , 202 2

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 21

- 00 538

- CV

____________ IN THE INTEREST OF C.U.D., S.L.D., A/K/A S.D., J.P.J.D., K.K.J.D., A.E.D., II, CHILDREN

On Appeal from t he 308th District Court

Har r is County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2018

- 37155

ORDER
Appellant A.E.D

. , the father of minors who are the su bject of this appeal, is represented by court

- appointed counsel on appeal, W. Leslie Shireman

. On December 13, 202 1 , appellant ’ s appointed counsel filed a brief stating the appeal is frivolous, under the authority of Anders v. Californ ia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In
re D.E.S. , 135 S.W.3d 326, 329

– 30 (Tex. App.

— Houston [ 14 th Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (applying Anders proc ed ures to a parental termination case). O n the same day, counsel filed a motion to withdraw as appellate counsel based on his Anders brief.2

The Supr eme Court of Texas h as concluded that the right to counsel under Family Code § 107.013(a)(1) through the exhau stion of appeals under Family
Code § 107.016(2)(B) encompasses all proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas, including the fi ling of a petition for revie w. In re P.M ., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27 (Tex. 2016) (per curiam). Once appointed by the trial court, counsel should be permitted to withdraw only for good cause and on appropriate terms and
conditions. Id . Mere dissatisfaction of couns el or cl ient with each other is not good

cause. Id . Nor is counsel’s belief that the client has no grounds to seek further
review from the court of appeals’ decision. Id . Counsel’s obligation to the client still may be satisfied by filing an appellate brie f meetin g the standards set in Anders v. California and its progeny. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 7 44; In re P.M ., 520
S .W.3d at 28. Ho wever, counsel’s motion to withdraw in this court, in the absence of additional grounds for withdrawal, may be pr em ature. I n re P.M ., 520 S.W.3d at
27. If counsel for appellant has concluded there are no non

- frivolous points to urge in a pet ition for revie w in the Supreme Court of Texas, then counsel may elect to file in that court a petition for review that satisfies the st andard s for a n Anders
brief. See id . (sta ting that “[i]n this Court, appointed counsel’s obligations can be satisfied by filing a p etit ion fo r review that satisfies the standards for an Anders brief”). Because the only grounds counsel has identified for withdrawal do not

con stitute go od cause, we deny counsel’s motion to withdraw.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Just ices Wis e, J ewell, and Po issant.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-93423, 333-38078, 333-44794,333-57486, 333-84904, 333-104108, 333-113651 and 333-123323) pertaining to the 2000 International Stock Option Plan, the 2000 Non-Officer Stock Option Plan, the 1997 Stock Option Plan, the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and the 1999 NonemployeeDirectors Stock Option Plan of Maxygen, Inc. and the Registration Statements on Forms S-3 (File Nos. 333-124940 and 333-125397) pertaining to the registration of an aggregate of 1,333,333 shares of common stock of Maxygen, Inc., of our reports datedMarch 10, 2006 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Maxygen, Inc., Maxygen, Inc. management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting of Maxygen, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2005. 

 

/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

 

Palo Alto, California 

March 14, 2006
##### 



Exhibit 10.32
  AMENDMENT No. 1
TO
LIMITED WAIVER TO
LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT
AND CONSENT
 This Amendment No. 1 to Limited Waiver to Loan and Security Agreement and Consent Amendment PlanetOut
Inc., PlanetOut PlanetOut USA Inc. , PlanetOut USA LPI Media Inc. LPI SpecPub, Inc. SpecPub RSVP Productions, Inc., RSVP Borrowers Borrower ORIX Venture
Finance LLC Lender
 Recitals
 Amendment
No. 2 Loan Agreement
 May Waiver
   Agreement
  1.




---



##### 



1.1 Term Sheet for Capital Event
 1.2 Capital Event Closings. Financing Initial Capital Raise Second
Closing
 1.3 Prepayments of Indebtedness. provided, however, provided further,
 1.4 Payment of Success Fee
 1.5 Repayment of Obligations.
 1.6 Payment of Deferral Fee. 2
        2. Consent .
 2.1 Closure of International Business.
 2.2 Sale of SpecPub.
 3. Borrowers Representations And Warranties
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)
 (d)
 (e)
 3




---



##### 



(f)
  4. Limitation
 5. Effectiveness
 5.1 Amendment
 5.2 Review of Financing Documents.
 5.3 Payment of Lender Expenses
  6. Release. Releasees Claims
 4




---



##### 



7. Indemnities .
 8. Counterparts
 9. Integration
 10. Governing Law; Venue .
  5




---



##### 



In Witness Whereof
 BORROWERS
 PlanetOut Inc.
    
    
    
    LPI Media Inc.By:
    
    /s/ Karen Magee
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Karen MageeName: Karen Magee
    
    
    
    Name: Karen MageeTitle: CEO
    
    
    
    Title: CEOAddress and facsimile number for notices:
    
    
    
    Address and facsimile number for notices:c/o PlanetOut Inc.
    
    
    
    c/o PlanetOut Inc.1355 Sansome Street
    
    
    
    1355 Sansome StreetSan Francisco, CA 94111
    
    
    
    San Francisco, CA 94111Attn: Todd Huge
    
    
    
    Attn: Todd Hugefax: (415) 834-6378
    
    
    
    fax: (415) 834-6378SpecPub, Inc.
    
    
    
    RSVP Productions, Inc.By:
    
    /s/ Karen Magee
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Karen MageeName: Karen Magee
    
    
    
    Name: Karen MageeTitle: CEO
    
    
    
    Title: CEOAddress and facsimile number for notices:
    
    
    
    Address and facsimile number for notices:c/o PlanetOut Inc.
    
    
    
    c/o PlanetOut Inc.1355 Sansome Street
    
    
    
    1355 Sansome StreetSan Francisco, CA 94111
    
    
    
    San Francisco, CA 94111Attn: Todd Huge
    
    
    
    Attn: Todd Hugefax: (415) 834-6378
    
    
    
    fax: (415) 834-6378




---



##### 



PlanetOut USA Inc.By:
    
    /s/ Karen Magee .Name: Karen Magee .Title: CEO .Address and facsimile number for notices:c/o PlanetOut Inc.1355 Sansome StreetSan Francisco, CA 94111Attn: Todd Hugefax: (415) 834-6378




---



##### 



LENDER
 ORIX Venture Finance LLC
 By:
    
    /s/ Kevin P. SheehanName: Kevin P. SheehanTitle: President & CEO
  th
Exhibit 23.1

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMS CONSENT







We  consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of Implant Sciences Corporation on Forms S-3 (No.s 333-109677, 333-111434, 333-117366, 333-124058, 333-127167, 333-129911) and Forms S-8 (No.s 333-42816, 333-111117, 333-138292, 333-144892) of our report, dated September 28, 2015, which includes an explanatory paragraph as to the Companys ability to continue as a going concern with respect to our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Implant Sciences Corporation  as of June 30, 2015 and 2014 and for the years ended June 30, 2015, 2014 and 2013, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Implant Sciences Corporation for the year ended June 30, 2015.







/s/ Marcum LLP



Marcum LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

September 28, 2015
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) UNDER

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





I, Kimble L. Jenkins, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2014, of MRI Interventions, Inc.; and
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







|Date: August 29, 2014 | /s/ Kimble L. Jenkins  
|--------------------- | -----------------------
|                      | Kimble L. Jenkins      
|                      | Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File No. 333-31076), Form S-8 (File No. 333-122329), Form S-3 (File No. 333-109607), Form S-3 (File No. 333-40936) and Form S-3 (File No. 333-147964) ofPrivate Media Group, Inc. of our report dated April 26, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements of ThinkForward, Inc. as of and for the year ended December 31, 2010. Our report contains an explanatory paragraph regardingthe Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. 

/s/ Odenberg, Ullakko, Muranishi & Co. LLP 

San Francisco, California 

June 2, 2011
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 5, 2019

No. 04-17-00338-CV

Travis CROW, Britt A. Crow, Laurian Crow Edison, and Karen A. Kraft,

Appellants

v.

Heddie Knappick LOOKADOO, Lisa Knappick Lucas, Mary Brown, Margaret Brown Nugent, 

Charles Brown, Joseph Gallagher, Josephine Brown Noll, Pamela Gallagher Palmer, and Irene 

B. Zoeller,

Appellees

From the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-10-00188-CVL

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellants have filed a Fourth Response to Abatement, in which appellants assert the 

parties jointly request that we extend the abatement of this appeal for thirty days so that the 

parties may effectuate the terms of their settlement agreement. The request is GRANTED. It is 

ORDERED that appellants file, on or before May 3, 2019, a response in this court addressing 

whether the abatement should be lifted and the appeal reinstated on the docket of this court.

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1, 43.2; see Caballero v. Heart of Texas Pizza, L.L.C., 70 S.W.3d 180, 180 

(Tex. App.—San Antonio 2001, no pet.).

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 5th day of April, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 22 (Thursday, February 3, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 5600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2022]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

49 CFR Part 605

[Docket No. FTA-99-5082]
RIN 2132-AA67


School Bus Operations; Amendment of Tripper Service Definition; 
Correction

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.

ACTION: Withdrawal of rulemaking; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a document 
in the Federal Register of January 28, 2005, withdrawing a notice of 
proposed rulemaking relating to its School Bus Operations regulation. 
This document misidentified the Regulation Identifier Number (RIN).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Martineau, 202-366-1936.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of January 28, 2005, in FR Doc. 05-1644 on 
page 4081, in the heading section, correct the Regulation Identifier 
Number (RIN) to read:
     RIN 2132-AA67

    Dated: January 28, 2005.
Scott A. Biehl,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Legislation and Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05-2022 Filed 2-2-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-57-M
STATE v. Robert Dwayne LEWIS

140PA18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 12, 2019

Kathryn L. VandenBerg, Assistant Appellant Defender, for Lewis, Robert Dwayne.

Milind Kumar Dongre, Attorney at Law, Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, Kristy M. Newton, District Attorney, Evelyn M. McCloud, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 8th of March 2019 by State of NC to Amend Appellee's Brief:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th of March 2019."
EXHIBIT 32.01

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The
Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (the Partnership), for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mark S. Stratton, the Chief
Executive Officer of Beacon Management Corporation (USA) as General Partner of the Partnership, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (i) the Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.



THE BEACON FINANCIAL FUTURES FUND, L.P.By:

Beacon Management Corporation (USA), General Partner of the PartnershipBy:

/s/ Mark S. StrattonMark S. StrattonChief Executive OfficerJuly 6, 2007


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), or otherwise subject to liability under that Section. This certification shall 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 this Exhibit 32 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

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



21
Exhibit 32

              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Jon C.  Nicolaysen,  Chief  Executive  Officer of Rancher  Energy Corp.  (the
Company),  certify,  that  pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of
the United States Code:

     (1) The Company's  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly  period
ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report)  fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2) Information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of
the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



/s/ Jon C. Nicolaysen
--------------------------------------------
Jon C. Nicolaysen
Chief Executive Officer & Acting Chief Accounting Officer
Dated:  February  18, 2011
STATE v. James A. COX

94P19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 22, 2019

Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., Attorney at Law, Southern Pines, for Cox, James A.

James D. Concepcion, Assistant Attorney General, Ernie Lee, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of March 2019 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of March 2019."
#### Board of County Commissioners of Sibley County *vs.*Henry Young & others.

Feb. 26, 1875.

"Variance between Summons and Complaint — Non-appealable Order. — Where the summons contains the proper notice prescribed in the case of “an action arising on contract for the payment of money only,” but the complaint on file indicates an “ action for the recovery of money” other than one arising on contract, etc., *Held,*that an order denying a motion made to set aside the complaint, on the ground of such non-conformity, is not an appealable order.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Sibley county, *Ghatfield,*J., presiding.

*Sylvester Kipp,*for appellants.

*D. Piclcit*and *F. Oadwell,*for respondent.

*336*By the Court.*

This action was commenced in the district court for Sibley county, by the filing of a complaint, and the service of a summons, unaccompanied with a copy of the complaint. The notice contained in the summons was that prescribed in the case of ‘‘an action arising on contract for the payment of money only,” by the provisions of the first subdivision of § 45, ch. 66, Gen. Stat. ; whereas the character of the action, as is claimed, required a notice in conformity with the second subdivision of that section. A motion was made in the district court, by the defendant, to' set aside the complaint, on the ground that it did not, in this respect, conform to the summons. The motion Avas denied, and from the order denying it, defendant appealed to this court. Such an order is not an appealable one. It neither involves the merits of the action, nor any part thereof, nor does it in effect determine the action, and prevent a judgment from Avhich an appeal can be taken. See *McCann v. N. Y. Cent. & H. R. R. Co.,*50 N. Y. 176.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.
DISMISS; Opinion Filed May 17 , 2013. 

# S

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 12

- 00507

- CV

ADRIANUS J. VAN'T WE STEINDE , Appellant

v.
BENTLEY INVESTMENT C OMPANY, L.L.C. , Appellee

On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 11

- 08155

- J

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices FitzGerald, Murphy, and Lewis Opinion by Justice FitzGerald

The parties have filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss advising that they have settled their

dispute and requesting dismissal of this appeal. After consideration, we grant the motion and

dismiss the appeal as requested by the parties. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1( a)(2)(A).

120507F.P05 /Kerry P. FitzGerald/

KERRY P. FITZGERALD

JUSTICE– 2

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ADRIANUS J. VAN'T WESTEINDE, Appellant

No. 05

- 12

- 00507

- CV V.

BENTLEY INVESTMENT COMPANY, L.L.C., Appellee On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 11

- 08155

- J. Opinion delivered by Justice FitzGerald. Justices Murphy and Lewis participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISM ISSED pursuant to the parties’ settlement agreement.

Judgment entered this 17 th day of May, 2013.

/Kerry P. FitzGerald/

KERRY P. FITZGERALD

JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as principal executive officer of
Xerium Technologies, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that, to his knowledge:

1) the Companys Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2010, 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 Companys Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.



/s/ Stephen R. LightStephen R. LightPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman(Principal Executive Officer)


November 5, 2010