alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

UNITED STATES ) No. ACM S32763

Appellee )

)

v. )

) ORDER

Jorge H. VILLANUEVA GONZALEZ)

Airman First Class (E-3) )

U.S. Air Force )

Appellant ) Panel 1

On 21 May 2024, Appellant submitted a Motion to Withdraw from Appellant Review and Motion to Attach. Specifically, Appellant moved to attach a 

DD Form 2330, Waiver/Withdrawal of Appellate Rights in General and Special 

Courts-Martial Subject to Review by a Court of Criminal Appeals, signed by 

Appellant and Appellant’s counsel on 20 May 2024.

The Government did not submit any opposition.

Accordingly, it is by the court on this 22d day of May, 2024,

ORDERED:

Appellant’s Motion to Withdraw from Appellate Review and Motion to Attach are GRANTED. Appellant’s case is forwarded to the Appellate Records 

Branch (JAJM) for further processing in accordance with Rules for CourtsMartial 1115(f)(3) and 1201, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024

ed.). 

FOR THE COURT

OLGA STANFORD, Capt, USAF

Commissioner
Exhibit 15.10















Consent
of Independent Consultant







We
consent to the reference to our firm in the form and context in which they appear in this Annual Report on Form 20-F, and the
inclusion of our reports herein for CNOOC Limited, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.







McDANIEL
& ASSOCIATES CONSULTANTS LTD.





/s/
P. A. Welch



By:_________________________



Name:
Phil A. Welch, P. Eng.



Title:
President & Managing Director



McDaniel
& Associates Consultants Ltd.



2200,
Bow Valley Square 3,



255
- 5 Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta,



T2P
3G6 Canada



March
29, 2017



















2200, Bow Valley Square 3, 255 - 5 Avenue
SW, Calgary AB T2P 3G6 Tel: (403) 262-5506 Fax: (403) 233-2744 www.mcdan.com
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 6715]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2347]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Nursing Research; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provision set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Nursing Research 
Initial Review Group.
    Date: February 28-March 1, 2005.
    Time: 8:15 a.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, 
Bethesda, MD 20817.
    Contact Person: Jeffrey M. Chernak, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Office of Review, National Institute of Nursing 
Research, 6701 Democracy Plaza, Suite 712, MSC 4870, Bethesda, MD 
20817, (301) 402-6959, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d2b1bab7a0bcb3b992bcbbbafcb5bda4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b6d5ded3c4d8d7ddf6d8dfde98d1d9c0">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.361, 
Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


    Dated: February 2, 2005.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-2347 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Case 1:06-cv-15086-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000055373
<NAME> KENTUCKY POWER COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      731,406
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     17,048
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          94,437
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         6,231
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  94,321
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 943,443
<COMMON>                                        50,450
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      158,750
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             67,524
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 276,724
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           260,838
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 175
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  65,790
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   60,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     12,355
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                 3,526
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 264,035
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  943,443
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      271,911
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            11,335
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     220,739
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     232,074
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         39,837
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 (44)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  39,793
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        21,392
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,401
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   18,401
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        22,329
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        9,917
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          42,295
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1> All common stock owned by parent company; no EPS required.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Charles N. Crittenton Company, Respondent, *v.*The City of New York et al., Appellants.

*Crittenton Co.*v. *City of New York,*178 App. Div. 824, affirmed.

(Argued June 5, 1918;

decided October 15, 1918.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered July 25, 1917, in favor of plaintiff upon the submission of a controversy under section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff sought to restrain the defendants from enforcing sections 116 and 117 of the Sanitary Code of the city of New York which regulate the sale of proprietary and patent medicines in that city and among other things require that “ The names of the ingredients of every such medicine, to which the therapeutic effects claimed are attributed, and the names of all' other ingredients, eexcpt such as are physiologically inactive, shall be registered in the department of health in such manner as the regulations of Ihe board of health may prescribe.” The Appellate Division held the provisions invalid. _

*608
      *William P. Burr, Corporation Counsel (Terence Farley*and *John F. O’Brien*of counsel) for appellants.

*George W. Wickersham, Harry B. Thompson*and *Francis H. McAdoo*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, without costs, on opinion of Cardozo, J., in *Fougera & Co.*v. *City of New York*(224 N. Y. 269).

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Cuddeback, Hogan and Cardozo, JJ. Concur in result: Chase, Collin and McLaughlin, JJ.
Exhibit 10.1


 


	
  

  	
  BANK OF OKLAHOMA:

  	
   

  



 


David G. Lamb

Bank of Oklahoma |
Senior Vice President

(918) 588-8685 voice

(918) 295-0400 fax


 


August 21,
2009


 


Greg Forrest


Xeta Technologies, Inc.


1814 W. Tacoma


Broken Arrow, OK
74012


 


RE: Waiver of Section 8.1
Funded Debt to EBITDA Ratio and waiver of section 8.3 Debt Service Coverage
Ratio of the Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement between Xeta Technologies, Inc.
(the “Borrower”), and Bank of Oklahoma, N.A. (the “Bank”), dated October 1,
2003 and as subsequently amended with the First Amendment to Revolving Credit
and Term Loan Agreement dated June 7, 2004, the Second Amendment to
Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement dated September 30, 2005, the
Third Amendment to Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement dated December 21,
2005, the Fourth Amendment to Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement dated September 28,
2006, the Fifth Amendment to Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement dated September 5,
2007 and the Sixth Amendment to Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement dated August 29,
2008 (collectively, the “Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement”).


 


Dear Greg:


 


Capitalized terms used in
this letter that are not otherwise defined herein have the respective meanings
assigned to them in the Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement. Section 8.1
requires the Borrowers to maintain a Funded Debt to EBITDA Ratio of no more
than 3.5:1. Section 8.3
requires the Borrowers to maintain a Debt Service Coverage Ratio of at
least 1.25:1. These ratios were not met for the four quarters ended 7/31/2009
due to impairment charges to goodwill and other assets.


 


Borrower has requested,
and Bank agrees, to waive Borrower’s non-compliance with Sections 8.1 and 8.3
of the Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement as of the four quarters ended
7/31/2009, and any consequences of the same. This waiver applies only to
Sections 8.1 and 8.3 of the Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement and for
the referenced dates. The waiver set forth herein shall not extend to any
existing or future Default or Event of Default and the Bank shall not be
obligated to waive any term or condition of the Loan Agreement or any of the
other Loan Documents in the future.


 


	
  Sincerely,

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ David G. Lamb

  	
   

  
	
  David G. Lamb
Case 1:07-cv-03436-LTS Document 19 Filed 04/11/2008 Page 1 of 1
SHARON KELLER

PRESIDING JUDGE

LAWRENCE E. MEYERS

CHERYL JOHNSON

MIKE KEASLER

BARBARA P. HERVEY

ELSA ALCALA

BERT RICHARDSON

KEVIN P. YEARY

DAVID NEWELL

JUDGES 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

P.O. BOX 12308, CAPI TOL STATION

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 ABEL ACOS TA

CLERK

(512) 463

- 1551

SIAN SCHILHAB

GENERAL COUNSEL

(512) 463

- 1597

S UPREME C OURT B UILDING

, 201 W EST 14 TH S TREET

, R OOM 106, A USTIN

, T EXAS 78701

W EBSITE WWW

. TXCOURTS

. GOV / CCA

. ASPX 

### January 21 , 2015

Humberto Rodriguez Jr.

Hughes Unit

- TDC # 1017893

Rt. 2, Box 4400

Gatesville, TX 76597

Re : RODRIGUEZ, HUMBERTO Jr.

CCA No. WR

- 81,853

- 01

Trial Court Case No. CR

- 0403

- 00

- A (1)

Your letter has been received. Please be advised:

IMP ORTANT: PLEASE INFORM THIS COURT OF ALL ADDRESS CHANGES IN

WRITING.

Our records show that on January 21, 2015 your motion for rehearing, tendered as “In Banc

Motion for Amended Opinion” was denied. The Court

, however, rendered an opinion in which

the pr ior opinion was withdrawn. Enclosed is a copy. Therefore, the Court will not be requiring

any additional copies of your motion for rehearing filed December 10, 2014.

Sincerely,

_____________________________ Abel Acosta, Clerk
#### GRAHAM v. CITY OF RALEIGH

No. 28 P 82.

Case below: 55 N.C. App. 107.

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 March 1982.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of The Enstar Group, Inc.
(the "Corporation") for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation,
certifies 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 results of operations of the
Corporation.

/s/ Nimrod T. Frazer
-----------------------------------------
Nimrod T. Frazer
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
September 19, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to The Enstar Group, Inc. and will be retained by The Enstar Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Case 1:07-cv-03366-GEL Document 3 Filed 05/15/2007 Page 1 of 1
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

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), Brian M. NeSmith, Chief Executive Officer of Blue Coat Systems, Inc. (the Company), and Kevin S. Royal, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | 1. | The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2008, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report),
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 30, 2008



|                                                       |  |  |  |                                                                 
|------------------------------------------------------ |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                       |  | 
|/s/ BRIAN M. NESMITH                                   |  |  |  | /s/ KEVIN S. ROYAL                                              
|Brian M. NeSmith President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Kevin S. Royal Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer

This certification is not deemed to be filed for purposes of section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification is not deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to
the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 31, 2017

s0524

Order 

Clerk

May 31, 2017

153309

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 153309

COA: 321551

Genesee CC: 13-033003-FC

ANDREW MAURICE RANDOLPH,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 24, 2015 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral 

argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. MCR 7.305(H)(1). 

The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order 

addressing: (1) whether a defendant’s failure to demonstrate plain error precludes a 

finding of ineffective assistance of trial counsel; and, in particular, (2) whether the 

prejudice standard under the third prong of plain error, People v Carines, 460 Mich 750, 

763-764 (1999) (“affecting substantial rights”), is the same as the Strickland prejudice 

standard, Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668, 694 (1984) (“reasonable probability” of 

a different outcome). See United States v Dominguez Benitez, 542 US 74, 83 (2004); 

People v Fackelman, 489 Mich 515, 537 n 16 (2011); People v Kowalski, 489 Mich 488, 

510 n 38 (2011). The parties should not submit mere restatements of their application 

papers.
ex10_5.htm



	
Exhibit Number 
	
Description

	
3.1
	
Articles of Incorporation (1)

	
3.2
	
By-Laws(1)

	
5.1
	
Opinion of Cane Clark, LLP, with consent to use(1)

	
10.1
	
License Agreement (1)

	10.2	Slack Services(1)
	10.3	Bendio Services(1)
	10.4	MERI China, LLC Manufacturing Bid(1)
	10.5	Consulting Agreement
	
23.1
	
Consent of Malone & Bailey, PC

	
24.1
	
Power of Attorney (see attached signature page)




 


(1) Included in previously filed registration statement.

 

 


	
 CROWBERRY


1622 EAST PLAZA DRIVE    POST FALLS, 1D 83854

208.640.6193    shellycroswhite@gmail.com     ac@allencroswhite.com





 


 

QUOTE





Mr. Greg Ruff,

Thank you for meeting with me yesterday.





CLIENT





Greg Ruff | QE Brushes | gregpaulruff@aol.com | 509.535.8131





PROJECT





K9 Toothbrush (poochYsmooch)






	
Logo (color study and dog image)
	
$400.00

	
Package Design (instructions and bar code)
	
$300.00








Cost includes 2 rounds of changes per project.

Should more time be needed, our hourly rate of $50.00 per/hr applies.






	
·  
	
50% to begin project, 50% upon completion-Please write check to Allen Croswhite





	
·  
	
Black and white logo and barcode proof by Friday July 17th




















Regards,









Shelly and Allen Croswhite
#### STATE v. GEORGE L. BROOKS.

(Filed 27 September, 1967.)

Criminal Law § 140—

Under tbe provisions of G.S. 15-6.2, concurrent sentences may be imposed for separate offenses, even though one is for a misdemeanor and the other a felony, so that one must be served in the State’s prison and one in the county jail.

Appeal by defendant from *Copeland, S.J.,*15 May 1967 Session of New HanoveR.

*463Defendant, through his attorney, Aaron Goldberg, Esquire, entered pleas of guilty to charges of breaking and entering (felony) and carrying a concealed weapon (misdemeanor). For the felony, the court imposed a sentence of not less than three nor more than four years in the State’s prison. For the misdemeanor, defendant received a sentence of twelve months in the common jail of New Hanover County “to be assigned to work under the supervision of the State Prison Department.” The judge ordered that this sentence “run concurrently with sentence on the count of breaking and entering.” Defendant appealed from the judgment rendered.

*Attorney General T. W. Bruton and Deputy Attorney General Harry W. McGalliard for the State.*

*Marvin J. Cowell, Jr., for defendant.*

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals because the two sentences,, which the court specified should run concurrently, do not specify the same place of confinement. He argues that “‘[a] sentence in the penitentiary and one adjudging that a man shall spend a certain time in the county jail cannot be served out concurrently.’ *Story v. State,*27 S.W. 2d 204.” *In re Smith,*235 N.C. 169, 172, 69 S.E. 2d 174, 176; *accord, In re Bentley,*240 N.C. 112, 81 S.E. 2d 206. Defendant contends that this case should be remanded to the superior Court for “proper judgment” in order to effectuate the judge’s stated intention that the two sentences run concurrently.

Defendant’s apprehension that he might be required to serve an additional 12 months after the completion of his 3-4-year sentence in the State’s prison is unfounded. After the decisions in *In re Smith*and *In re Bentley, supra,*the General Assembly of North Carolina at its 1955 Regular Session enacted G.S.-15-6.2:

> “When by a judgment of a court or by operation of law a prison sentence runs concurrently with any other sentence á prisoner shall not be required to serve any additional time in prison solely because-the concurrent sentences are for different grades of offenses or that it is required that they be served in different places of confinement.”

As a result of this statute, defendant’s two sentences run concurrently. When he has completed the sentence in the State’s prison, defendant will be entitled to his release..

No error.
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-5 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-5 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 2 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-5 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 3 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-5 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 4 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-5 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 5 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-5 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 6 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-5 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 7 of 7
**Exhibit32.2**

CERTIFICATIONSOF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERUNDER SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection withthe filing by ARTISTdirect, Inc. (the “Registrant”) of its Annual Report onForm 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 (the “Annual Report”)with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, Robert N. Weingarten, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

(1)           TheAnnual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)           Theinformation contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theRegistrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| Date:     April 16,  2007 | By:    | /s/ ROBERT N. WEINGARTEN      |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|--------|
|                                                    |   | Robert N. Weingarten          |   |
|                                                    |   | Chief Financial Officer       |   |
|                                                    |   | (Principal Financial Officer) |   |

 

----
#### STATE v. ALFORD

No. 93 PC.

Case below: 38 N.C. App. 236.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 17 October 1978. Appeal dismissed ex mero motu for lack of substantial constitutional question 17 October 1978.
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 31 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 31 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 2 of 2