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

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-20-00337-CR

EX PARTE Abel MONTES

From the 2nd 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 20-0995-CR-A

Honorable Jessica Crawford, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE RIOS, AND JUSTICE WATKINS

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the trial court’s order 

denying Abel Montes’s amended habeas corpus application is REVERSED, and this case is 

REMANDED to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. The clerk of this court 

is ORDERED to issue the mandate immediately. See TEX. R. APP. P. 18.6 (allowing the appellate 

court to issue the mandate with its judgment in an accelerated appeal); Ex parte Carson, 215

S.W.3d 921, 924 (Tex. App—Texarkana 2007, no pet.) (issuing the mandate immediately in an 

article 17.151 bail reduction case).

SIGNED February 17, 2021.

_____________________________

Irene Rios, Justice
Eagle Broadband, Inc., and Subsidiaries
                 Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
                                 August 31, 2004

Exhibit 23.2

     Consent of Lopez, Blevins, Bork & Associates, LLP
     Independent Public Accountants

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-110309 and 333-117690) and on Form S-3 (Nos.
333-109481, 333-106074, 333-118117, 333-111160 and 333-97913) of Eagle
Broadband, Inc., of our report dated November  15, 2004, relating to the
financial statements, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

/s/ Lopez, Blevins, Bork & Associates, LLP
------------------------------------------
Lopez, Blevins, Bork & Associates, LLP
Houston, Texas
December 28, 2004
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Genesis Biopharma, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Michael Handelman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Company.


Dated:  May 20, 2011
By:
/s/ Michael HandelmanMichael HandelmanChief Financial Officer


This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
FLN (Rev. 4/2004) Deficiency Order Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

STATE OF FLORIDA, et al

vs

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al

Case No. 3:10cv91/RV/EMT

ORDER

TO: Paul Andrew Mitchell

Your document, FIRST SUPPLEMENT TO PROOF OF SERVICE (received 3/31/10),

was referred to the undersigned with the following deficiencies:

(a) The document does not have an original signature or proper

electronic signature.

(b) Your document is not properly captioned for this court. Every paper

you file after the complaint must have the name of this court, the

case style, the case number and the title of your pleading.

5.1(B)(1)(2)].

For these reasons, IT IS ORDERED that:

(1) The document shall remain in the electronic file, but the court will not

consider it until you have corrected the above deficiencies through the

filing of a corrected document.

(2) The submitted hard copy of the document shall be returned to you by the

Clerk without electronic filing. It may be resubmitted after the above noted

deficiencies are corrected.

DONE and ORDERED this 5th day of April, 2010.

 /s Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00091-RV-EMT Document 9 Filed 04/05/10 Page 1 of 1
#### NICHOLSON v. HOSPITAL

No. 148 PC.

No. 104 (Spring Term).

Case below: 43 N.C. App. 615.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 6 February 1980.
# C_2010025EN.01001901.xml

| 2.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/19

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

1 February 2010

2010/C 25/11

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3913 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 125,60 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4454 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87485 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,1417 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,4725 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,1965 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,065 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 271,35 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7087 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0045 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,0863 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,0745 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5748 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4868 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,8066 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9774 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,9650 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 627,10 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,5342 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,4990 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3152 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 074,66 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7509 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 64,871 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 42,2510 |
| THB | Thai baht | 46,177 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6120 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,1398 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 64,5220 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3913

JPY

Japanese yen

125,60

DKK

Danish krone

7,4454

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87485

SEK

Swedish krona

10,1417

CHF

Swiss franc

1,4725

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,1965

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,065

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

271,35

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7087

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0045

RON

Romanian leu

4,0863

TRY

Turkish lira

2,0745

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5748

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4868

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,8066

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9774

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,9650

KRW

South Korean won

1 627,10

ZAR

South African rand

10,5342

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,4990

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3152

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 074,66

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7509

PHP

Philippine peso

64,871

RUB

Russian rouble

42,2510

THB

Thai baht

46,177

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6120

MXN

Mexican peso

18,1398

INR

Indian rupee

64,5220

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 07-20485 Summary Calendar

_____________________ IN THE MATTER: RICHARD EDMUND SURGENT, Debtor FRED L. BARRETT, as Trustee of GRACE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TRUST, Appellant v. ROBBYE R. WALDRON, Trustee, Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(4:06-CV-3942) Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appellant Fred L. Barrett does not purport to be an attorney or lawyer; yet, despite repeated notifications that he cannot represent any corporation, partnershi p, association, trust, or other non-natural juridical person in any federal court, Barrett persists in filing pleadings on behalf of Grace United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 26, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk2

Development Company Trust in his alleged capacity as Trustee. All such filings, including the appeal of the captioned case to this court and briefs and record excerpts filed here in connection therewith, are null and void. Indeed, tardy as it was, his appeal of the rulings of the bankruptcy court to the district court were without legal eff ect for the same reason and thus failed to vest the district court with jurisdiction to entertain Grace’s (or Barrett’s) action. The illegitimacy of these proceedings is merely compounded by Barrett’s feckless efforts to appeal to us from the district court’s dismissal for its own lack of jurisdiction. We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Inasmuch as Barrett’s
efforts to obtain an appeal in this court have absolutely no basis in fact or law , it is frivolous as a matter of law; and Barrett is ordered to file a pleading in this court within ten (10) days following the filing date of this opinion, not to exceed ten pages in length, to show cause why he should not be sanctioned pursuant to Federal Rule of A ppellate Procedure 38 for just damages and single or double costs of this appeal. Further, Barrett is cautioned that, except for filing the show-cause pleading thus ordered, any filings or other efforts on his part to extend, prolong, or otherwise continue pursuing the instant matter in this court or any other court within the Fifth Circuit shall result in the imposition of further sanctions. DISMISSED; Appellant ordered to show cause.
#### STATE v. LANDRUM

No. 116 PC.

Case below: 43 N.C. App. 619.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 February 1980.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

SEAN REILLY,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO. 4:10-cv-00326-MP -GRJ

LARRY CAMPBELL, et al,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

Plaintiff, a former inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint

under 42 U.S.C. §1983. (Doc. 1). On the same date Plaintiff filed the Complaint and a

motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis with inmate account information (Doc. 2),

Plaintiff advised the Court that his address had changed effective August 1, 2010 from

the Leon County Jail to a residential address in Miami, Florida. Consequently, because

Plaintiff is no longer a prisoner, he is required to file a motion for leave to proceed in

forma pauperis as a non-prisoner and provide current financial information. 

Local court rules provide that no "civil action commenced by pro se litigants

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, or 1346, shall be considered by the court

unless the appropriate forms have been properly completed and filed by the litigant."

N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 5.1(J)(2). Plaintiff must, therefore, submit an "amended complaint,"

clearly designated as such, on court forms which will be provided to him by the Clerk of

Court and submit a new application to proceed in forma pauperis for non-prisoners with

a financial affidavit.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
Page 2 of 2

1. The clerk shall forward to Plaintiff a form complaint and an application for

leave to proceed in forma pauperis for non-prisoners, with financial affidavit, which

Plaintiff shall complete and return on or before December 20, 2010. 

2. The motion for leave to proceed (Doc. 2) is DEEMED MOOT. 

3. Failure to respond to this order as instructed will result in a recommendation

of dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with an order of

this court. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 6 day of December 2010. 

th

s/Gary R. Jones

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 4:10-cv-00326-MP -GRJ
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2431 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2431

    To require the Federal Communications Commission to promulgate 
regulations requiring voice service providers to provide consumers opt-
       out call-blocking programs by default and free of charge.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 1, 2019

Mr. Manchin (for himself and Mr. Jones) introduced the following bill; 
    which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To require the Federal Communications Commission to promulgate 
regulations requiring voice service providers to provide consumers opt-
       out call-blocking programs by default and free of charge.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Stop Unwanted Calls for All Act''.

SEC. 2. CALL-BLOCKING PROGRAMS.

    (a) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Call-blocking program.--The term ``call-blocking 
        program'' means a call-blocking program described in the 
        Declaratory Ruling in the matter of Advanced Methods to Target 
        and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, adopted by the Commission on 
        June 6, 2019 (FCC 19-51; CG Docket No. 17-59).
            (2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
        Communications Commission.
    (b) Regulations.--
            (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate 
        regulations to require voice service providers to provide 
        consumers opt-out call-blocking programs by default and free of 
        charge.
            (2) Delayed implementation for small and rural providers.--
        The Commission shall delay by 1 year the applicability of the 
        regulations promulgated under paragraph (1) to small voice 
        service providers and rural voice service providers, as defined 
        by the Commission.
            (3) Exempted calls.--The Commission, in consultation with 
        voice service providers, shall ensure that the call-blocking 
        programs required under the regulations promulgated under 
        paragraph (1) do not block calls that are exempted from the 
        prohibitions under section 227 of the Communications Act of 
        1934 (47 U.S.C. 227).
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 237 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 237

    To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to permit nurse 
  practitioners and physician assistants to satisfy the documentation 
 requirement under the Medicare program for coverage of certain shoes 
                     for individuals with diabetes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 28, 2019

Mr. Brown (for himself and Ms. Collins) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to permit nurse 
  practitioners and physician assistants to satisfy the documentation 
 requirement under the Medicare program for coverage of certain shoes 
                     for individuals with diabetes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PERMITTING NURSE PRACTITIONERS AND PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS TO 
              SATISFY MEDICARE DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENT FOR COVERAGE 
              OF CERTAIN SHOES FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DIABETES.

    Section 1861(s)(12) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395x(s)(12)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``, nurse 
        practitioner, or physician assistant'' after ``physician''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (C), by inserting ``, nurse 
        practitioner, or physician assistant'' after each occurrence of 
        ``physician''.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE v. FLOWERS

No. 73 PC.

Case below: 12 N.C. App. 487.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 December 1971.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

CECIL McCRAY,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-196-SPM-GRJ

A GRAVES, et al,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On October 14, 2010, the Court ordered Plaintiff to advise the Court of his new

address on or before November 15, 2010. The Clerk mailed the order to Plaintiff’s last

known address at the Levy County Jail, but it was returned as undeliverable. Plaintiff

has not filed a change of address. On December 30, 2010, the Court sent Plaintiff the

forms necessary to proceed in forma pauperis at an address obtained by the Clerk

through the Department of Corrections website. The Court directed Plaintiff to file the

completed forms on or before January 14, 2011, and warned Plaintiff that failure to

respond would result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. Doc. 8. As of

the date of this Order, Plaintiff has failed to respond. 

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed for

failure to comply with an order of the Court and for failure to prosecute. 

IN CHAMBERS, at Gainesville, Florida, this 22 day of April 2011.

nd

s/Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:10-cv-00196-SPM-GRJ Document 11 Filed 04/22/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

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: 1:11-cv-00001-MP -GRJ

Case 1:10-cv-00196-SPM-GRJ Document 11 Filed 04/22/11 Page 2 of 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0107

SAWYER BROWNING,

 Petitioner and Appellant,

 v.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND 

INDUSTRY, UNEMPLOYMENT

INSURANCE APPEALS BOARD; 

CENTRAL PLUMBING AND

HEARING, and BIG SKY COLLISION 

CENTER,

 Respondents and Appellees.

SECOND

ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly 

and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c),

On March 6, 2023, Leanne Schraudner was appointed as mediator. She has since 

informed this office that she must decline the appointment.

ACCORDINGLY, the appointment of Ms. Schraudner is rescinded, and: IT IS 

ORDERED THAT Michael P. Sand, whose name appears next on the list of attorneys 

desiring appointment as mediators for Money Judgments appeals which is maintained 

pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the mediation process 

required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 

7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being sent to counsel of record for the parties, or to the 

parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this March 6, 2023.

03/06/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0107
_ 

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Sawyer Browning, Central Plumbing and Heating, Big Sky Collision Center, 

Quinlan L. O'Connor, Michael P. Sand
Exhibit 10.2


 





AMENDMENT


 


TO


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment to Employment
Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made as of April 8, 2020, by and among GL Brands, Inc., a Nevada corporation
(the “Company”) and Daniel Nguyen (the “Employee”).


 


WHEREAS, the Company
and the Employee are parties to that certain Employment Agreement, dated as of May 31, 2019, and amended November 18, 2019 (the
“Agreement”);


 


WHEREAS, the parties
desire to now amend certain of the terms of the Employee Agreement on the terms set forth herein; and


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the
Company and the Employee hereby agree as follows:


 


1.              
Capitalized Terms. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings given to them in the Agreement.


 


2.              
Amendment. The Agreement is hereby amended to reduce the Base Salary from $150,000 to $130,000.


 


3.              
Agreement. Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


4.              
Governing Law. This Amendment shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the internal laws of the State
of Texas, without giving effect to the principles of conflicts of law.


 


5.              
Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument.


 


 


 


[Signature
page follows]


 






    	 	1	 



     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date first written above.


 





	 	 THE COMPANY:


 


GL Brands, Inc.


 


By: /s/ Carlos Frias

       Name: Carlos Frias

       Title: CEO


 


THE EMPLOYEE:


 


Daniel Nguyen


 


By: /s/ Daniel Nguyen

      Individually






 


 


 


 


 





[Signature Page to Amendment to Employment
Agreement]


 






    	 	2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7067

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RAYMOND IDEMUDIA AIGBEKAEN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:15-cr-00462-JKB-2)

Submitted: January 18, 2024 Decided: February 16, 2024

Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Raymond Idemudia Aigbekaen, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Fitzgerald Aubin, Assistant 

United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, 

Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7067 Doc: 15 Filed: 02/16/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Raymond Idemudia Aigbekaen appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States 

v. Aigbekaen, No. 1:15-cr-00462-JKB-2 (D. Md. Aug. 4, 2023). We deny his motions for 

bail or release pending appeal and for “all transcripts from the lower court.” We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7067 Doc: 15 Filed: 02/16/2024 Pg: 2 of 2