alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 15, 2022

No. 04-22-00066-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.J., a child,

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021-PA-00153

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

ORDER

This is an accelerated appeal of an order terminating appellant’s parental rights which 

must be disposed of by this court within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed. TEX.

R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2. The trial court signed a final order of termination on January 12, 2022. 

Because this is an accelerated appeal, the notice of appeal was due by February 1, 2022. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due by 

February 16, 2022. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. Appellant’s notice of appeal is file-stamped 

February 2, 2022—within the time allowed for filing a motion for extension of time to file the 

notice of appeal. 

A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good 

faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the fifteen-day 

grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. 

Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). But “once 

the period for granting a motion for extension of time under Rule [26.3] has passed, a party can 

no longer invoke the appellate court’s jurisdiction.” Id. 

Because the notice of appeal was untimely filed but within the fifteen-day grace period, 

we ORDER appellant to file a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file 

the notice of appeal in a timely manner by February 25, 2022. If appellant fails to respond 

within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.3(c). All other appellate deadlines are suspended until further order of this court. 

_________________________________

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

court on this 15th day of February, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
rsls_Ex10_6


		
			Exhibit 10.6
		

		
			AMENDMENT TO SERIES G COMMON STOCK PURCHASE WARRANT
		

		
			 
		

		
			This Amendment (this “Amendment”), dated as of March 31, 2020, is entered into by and among ReShape Lifesciences Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Armistice Capital Master Fund Ltd. (the “Holder”).  
		

		
			WHEREAS, the Company issued to the Holder a Series G Common Stock Purchase Warrant on March 25, 2020 (the “Warrant”).
		

		
			WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5(l) of the Warrant, the Warrant may be amended with the written consent of the Company and the Holder.
		

		
			WHEREAS, capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Warrant.
		

		
			NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
		

			
	
			
				 1.
			Amendment of Section 2(b) of the Warrant. Section 2(b) (Exercise Price)  of the Warrant is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:




		
			“b)  Exercise Price.  The aggregate exercise price per share of Common Stock under this Warrant shall be $3.70 (the “Exercise Price”).”
		

			
	
			
				 2.
			Amendment to Section 4(d) of the Warrant. Section 4(d) of the Warrant is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:




		
			“d) The Company is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Warrant and to perform its Obligations under this Warrant.  The execution, delivery and performance by the Company of this Warrant do not and will not (i) require any consent or approval of any governmental agency or authority, or (ii) conflict with (1) any provision of applicable law, (2) the charter, by-laws or other organizational documents of the Company or (3) any agreement, indenture, instrument or other document, or any judgment, order or decree, which is binding upon the Company or any of its properties.”
		

			
	
			
				 3.
			Miscellaneous.  Except as expressly set forth hereunder, the terms and provisions of the Warrant shall remain in full force and effect after the execution of this Amendment and shall not be in any way changed, modified or superseded by the terms set forth herein.  This Amendment may be executed in several identical counterparts all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.




		
			(Signature Page Follows)
		

		
			


		 





		

		
			IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to Series G Common Stock Purchase Warrant to be duly executed as of the day and year written above.
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

			
					
						 

					
						COMPANY:

					
						 

					
						RESHAPE LIFESCIENCES INC.

					
						 

					
						By: /s/ barton P. bandy 

					
						Name: Barton P. Bandy

					
						Title: Chief Executive Officer

					
					
						 

					
						HOLDER:

					
						 

					
						ARMISTICE CAPITAL MASTER FUND LTD.

					
						 

					
						By: /s/ steven boyd

					
						Name: Steven Boyd

					
						Title: CIO of Armistice Capital, LLC, the Investment Manager
CERTIFICATION

I, Derek L. Caldwell, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Lincoln International
Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



                                                 /s/ Derek L. Caldwell
                                                 ------------------------
                                                 Name:  Derek L. Caldwell
                                                 Title:  President
                                                 Date:  March 9, 2007
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JESUS PEDROSO,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:10cv167-MP/WCS

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORTATION, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before me upon referral from the Clerk. In an order filed July 9,

2010, Plaintiff was directed to file an amended complaint by August 10, 2010. Plaintiff

was specifically warned that a recommendation would be made that this case be

dismissed if there was a failure to comply with that order. Doc. 9. On July 28, 2010,

Plaintiff filed a motion for enlargement of time, doc. 10, which was granted and his time

for filing the amended complaint extended to October 4, 2010. To date, no response

has been received from the Plaintiff. 

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to

prosecute. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). 
Page 2 of 2

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to obey a

court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.), cert.

denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). Since Plaintiff has failed to comply with an order or to

prosecute this case, this complaint should now be dismissed without prejudice. 

Plaintiff shall have a 14 day period after service of this report and

recommendation in which to file objections. This will also afford Plaintiff a final

opportunity to show good cause for this failure to respond. Plaintiff may do so by filing a

motion for reconsideration which will be referred to me by the Clerk.

It is therefore, respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

without prejudice.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on October 20, 2010.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days

after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the

scope of review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No. 4:10cv167-MP/WCS
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CHRISTOPHER MILLER,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 5D18-2132

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

________________________________/

Opinion filed July 20, 2018

Petition for Belated Appeal

A Case of Original Jurisdiction. 

Robert Wesley, Public Defender, Orlando, 

and Peter C. Schmer, Assistant Public 

Defender, Orlando, for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent. 

PER CURIAM. 

The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed

with the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the May 30, 2018

judgment and sentences rendered in Case No. 2016-CF-7640-A-O, in the Circuit Court 

in and for Orange County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(6)(D). 

PETITION GRANTED.

PALMER, LAMBERT and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
#### STATE v. HALL

No. 360P82.

Case below: 57 N.C. App. 544.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 7 July 1982.
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 36-4 Filed 12/07/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 36-4 Filed 12/07/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE v. GAULDIN

No. 158 PC.

Case below: 44 N.C. App. 19.

Petition by Attorney General for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 February 1980.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

CAESAR WHITE, JR.,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:09cv574/LAC/EMT

SUSAN NELMS, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

ORDER

By order of this court dated March 9, 2010, Plaintiff was given thirty (30) days in which to

pay the full filing fee in the amount of $350.00 (Doc. 14). That time has elapsed, and the court has

received no response from Plaintiff.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Within TWENTY (20) DAYS from the date of docketing of this order Plaintiff shall

show cause, if any, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the

court.

2. Plaintiff’s failure to respond to this order may result in a recommendation of

dismissal of this action.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of April 2010.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

 ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 1:07-cv-03595-JSR Document 1 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03595-JSR Document 1 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03595-JSR Document 1 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03595-JSR Document 1 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03595-JSR Document 1 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03595-JSR Document 1 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 6 of 6
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       UT
<CIK> 0000861388
<NAME> LG&E ENERGY CORP.
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                 MAR-31-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                                    PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                         3,407,651
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                         599,603
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                              744,656
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                            253,625
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    5,005,535
<COMMON>                                            775,299 <F1>
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                              (451)<F2>
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                 354,944
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                    1,129,792
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                         135,140
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                              1,279,426
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                  443,520
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                            0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                       411,808
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                 0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                               0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                          0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                    1,605,849
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                     5,005,535
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                           625,390
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                 16,082
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                          549,470 <F3>
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                          565,552
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                              59,838
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                    5,009
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                       64,847
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             33,237
<NET-INCOME>                                         31,610
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                           1,728
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                        29,882
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             41,172
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            16,910
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                              125,157
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.23
<FN>
<F1>Includes common stock expense of $1,714.
<F2>Represents unrealized loss on marketable securities,
    net of taxes.
<F3>Includes equity in earnings of affiliates of
    $5,930.
</FN>



</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

Statement of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, the undersigned, David D. Clark, the Chief Financial Officer of NutriSystem, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies that based on the undersigneds knowledge:



| | 1) | The Companys Form 10-K Annual Report for the period ended December 31, 2007 (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 Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: February 29, 2008

/S/ DAVID D. CLARKSenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
##### 



EXHIBIT 12.2
 BARCLAYCARD FUNDING PLC
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, and all reports on
Form 6-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect
of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of
Barclaycard Funding PLC;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these
reports is included in these reports;4.
    
    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and
based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required
under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and5.
    
    The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicers compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon
the report provided by an independent public accountant, after
conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation
Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement.
  Name:
  Paul Gerard Turner
Title:     Director
Date:     June 23, 2006
 - 27 -
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

vs. 3:10cr56/LAC 

BARRY CHATFIELD JOHNSTON,

 Defendant.

_____________________________________________________________________

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

The defendant, by consent, has appeared before me pursuant to Rule 11,

Fed.R.Crim.P., and has entered a plea of guilty to the two count indictment against

him. After cautioning and examining the defendant under oath concerning the

subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable

and voluntary, and that the offense charged is supported by an independent basis

in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore

recommend that the plea of guiltybe accepted and that the defendant be adjudicated

guilty and have sentence imposed accordingly.

Dated: January 20, 2011

/s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed

within 24 hours after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may

appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not

control. A copy of objections shall be served upon all other parties. Failure to

object may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. §

636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11 Cir. 1988). th
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 203 (Monday, October 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 59552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5220]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

United States Parole Commission


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

Public Announcement

    Pursuant to the government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. 94-409) [5 
U.S.C. 552b]

Agency Holding Meeting: Department of Justice, United States Parole 
Commission.

Date and Time: 11 a.m., Thursday, October 25, 2007.

Place: U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Boulevard, 4th Floor, 
Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815.

Status: Closed.

Matters Considered: The following matters will be considered during the 
closed portion of the Commission's Business Meeting:
    Petitions for reconsideration involving three original jurisdiction 
cases pursuant to 28 CFR 2.27.

Agency Contact: Thomas W. Hutchison, Chief of Staff, United States 
Parole Commission, (301) 492-5990.

    Dated: October 17, 2007.
Sharon A. Gervasoni,
Acting General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission.
[FR Doc. 07-5220 Filed 10-18-07; 11:44 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-31-M
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-6 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-6 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-6 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-6 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-6 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 5 of 5
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-17-00242-CR

Rashad Rudolph

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

2nd 25th District Court of Gonzales County, Texas

Trial Cause No. I-13-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 5, 2018
Case 1:07-cr-00379-LTS Document 8 Filed 01/25/2008 Page 1 of 1