alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. PED RO M O RA LES- CA RD EN A S, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 10- 30120 D . C. N o . 2 : 0 9 - c r - 0 0 0 1 0 - LRS ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on L onnyR . S uko, C hi e f

Judge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d N ove m be r16, 2010 ** B efo re: T A S H IM A , B E R Z O N , an dC L IF T O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P e d r o M o r a le s - C a r d e n a s ap p e a ls f r o m th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s o r d e rd e n y in g h is m ot i on, unde rF e d. R . C r i m . P . 35( a ) , t o c orr e c tthe j udgm e nt . W e ha ve j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n dw e a f f i rm. T he go vernm entcont ends thatthe appeal w ai ver i n M oral es -C ar denas’ pl ea 

# FI LED NO V 19 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 30120 2 a gr e e m e ntpr e c l ude s ourr e a c hi ng the m e r i t s of M or a l e s - C a r de na s ’ c l a i m on appeal . B ec ause M oral es -C ar denas c hal l enges the se nt ence i m po se d i n the w ri tt en j ud gm entas un const i tut i on al , the appeal w ai ver does notappl y, and w e m ayre ac h th e m e r its . See U

ni ted States v. B i bler , 495 F . 3d 621, 624 ( 9th C i r . 2007) ( c i t a t i ons om i tt ed). M o r a le s - C a r d e n a s c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e dw h e n it d e c lin e dto c orr e c tthe w r i tt e n j udgm e ntt o r e f l e c tthe s e nt e nc e of

ni ne m onths i m pr i s onm e nt p ro n o u n ce dat th e s en ten cin g h ea rin g . T h is co n ten ti o n fa il s b ec au se th e c o u rt’s oral pron ou ncem entof se nt ence w as am bi gu ou s. A l tho ug h an u nam bi gu ou s ora l p r o n o u n c e m e n t c o n tr o ls ad ir e c tlyc o n f lic tin g w r itte n ju d g m e n t, se e U ni ted States v. Mu n o z-D ela R o sa , 495 F . 2d 253, 256 ( 9th C i r . 1974) ( pe rc ur i a m ) , w he n “ the o r a l p r o n o u n c e m e n t is a m b ig u o u s o ro p e n to r e a s o n ab le in te rp r e ta tio n . . . , it cann otpo ss i bl y ‘ control . ’ ” U ni ted States v. O ’B ri en , 7 8 9 F .2 d1 3 4 4 , 1 3 4 7 ( 9 th C i r. 19 86 ). AF F I RME D.
EXHIBIT
32.1
 
 Written
Statement of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350
 
 Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of JAKKS Pacific, Inc.
(“Registrant”), hereby certifies that the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Registrant.
 
 Date:
February 27, 2009
 
 /s/
      JACK FRIEDMANJACK
      FRIEDMANChairman
      and Co-Chief Executive
Officer
 
 
 89
Amendment No 4 to the Company's Amended and Restated 2003 Incentive



 Exhibit 10.1 
 AMENDMENT No. 4 
 To 
 AMENDED AND RESTATED 
 SAVVIS, INC. 
 2003 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN 
 The
Amended and Restated SAVVIS, Inc. 2003 Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby amended as set forth below, effective as of the date of adoption (the “Adoption Date”) of this amendment (the “Amendment”) by the
Board of Directors of SAVVIS, Inc. (the “Corporation”), subject to approval of this Amendment by the stockholders of the Corporation, as provided below: 
 1. The first sentence of Section 4 is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 
 “4. STOCK
SUBJECT TO THE PLAN 
 Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 18 hereof, the number of shares of Stock available for
issuance under the Plan shall be the sum of (i) 12,800,000 and (ii) the number of shares remaining as of the date that this amended and restated Plan was approved by the Company’s stockholders, plus the number of shares that
subsequently became or become available under the terms of the SAVVIS, Inc. 1999 Stock Option Plan (including in the event of the expiration, termination, or forfeiture of options granted under the plan), of the 3,066,666 shares previously
authorized for issuance under the SAVVIS, Inc. 1999 Stock Option Plan, as amended, as described in Section 1 and the last paragraph of this Section 4.” 
 2. The Plan shall be unchanged in all other respects. 
 3. This Amendment is adopted subject to approval within one year of
the Adoption Date by the stockholders of the Corporation. If the stockholders fail to approve this Amendment within one year of the Adoption Date, no awards may be granted under the Plan covering shares of stock in excess of the number permitted
under the Plan as in effect before the Adoption Date. 
 * * * 
 The foregoing Amendment to the Plan was duly adopted and approved by the Board of Directors of the Corporation on February 10, 2009, subject to approval of the Amendment by stockholders of the Corporation.
**Received:8306347711 JAN-21-2015** **15:E8 FROM:MINI MRRT** **S30S347711 Jan** **21 2015** **03:14cm POCI2** **TO:121033527G2 P.S'3** **III**

# ?t**(/**

# rfk**Received:8306347711 JPN-21-2015** **15:29 FROM:MINI** **MART »4** **8306347711 Jan** **21 2015** **03:15pm P003** **TO:12103352762 P.3'3** 

# flnna/i**//) JJcJ^y/r** 

# Z^^2^**Received:8306347711 JfiN-El-2015** **15:28 FROM:MINI** **MART »4** **8306347711 Jan** **21 2015** **03:14pra TO:12103352762** **P001 P.** **1'3 SANDEGDRYAN** **MARION CHIEF** **JUSTICE KAREN** **ANOELINI MARIALYNDARNARD** **RHUKCA MARTINEZ** **PATRICIA ALVARUZ** **LUZ ELENA** **CHAPA PLACK** **(VACANT) JUSTICKS** 

## COURT**OF APPEALS** **FOURTH COURT** **OK APPEALS** **DISTRICT CADUNA-lll-EVES** **JUSTlce CENTER** **300 DOLOROSA,** **SUITE 3200** **SAN ANTONIO.** **TEXAS 782OJ-3O37** **WWW TXCOURTS** **OOV/4THCOA ASPX** **KF.ITH G.** **MOTTLE CLERK** **OF COURT** **TELliHIIUNE 010)** **335-263 FACSIMILE** **NO (210)335-2762** 

### January**9.2015 Kristi** **Rene Nix** **P.O. Box** **293123**

### Kerrville,**TX 78029** 

### M.**Patrick Maguire** **M. Patrick** **Maguire, P.C.** **945 Barnclt** **Si.**

### Kerrville,**TX 78028** 

### DELIVERED**VIA E-MATL** **Scott Monroe** 

### District**Attorney 198th** **Judicial District** 

### 402**Clearwater Paseo** **Suite 500** 

### Kerrville,**TX 78028** **DELIVERED VIA** **E-MAIL**

### RE:**Court of** **Appeals Number:** **04-13-00569-CR Trial** **Court Case** **Number: Bl** **1614 Style:** **Kristi Rene** **Nix v.** 

### The**State of Texas** 

## Enclosed**please find the** **order which** **the Honorable** **Court of** **Appeals has** **issued in** **reference to** **the above** **styled and** **numbered cause.** **If you** **should have** **any questions,** **please do** **not hesitate** **to contact** **me. Very** **truly yours,** 

### KEITH**E. HOTTLE,** **CLERK Carmen** **De Leon** 

### Deputy**Clerk, Ext.** **53262**
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection
with the Annual Report of Global Med Technologies, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned,
in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

|(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:  March
 30, 2006

| | /s/ Michael I. Ruxin, M.D.Name: Michael I. Ruxin, M.D.Acting Chief
     Financial Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other documentation
authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by
Section 906, has been provided to Global Med Technologies, Inc. and will be retained
by Global Med Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.

---
#### Hoff, Appellant, *v.*Hamilton.

April 17, 1904:

*Appeals*— Paper-books—Failure *to print evidence.*

A paper-book will be suppressed and the judgment affirmed where the appellant fails to print the evidence given on the trial. The recital of facts in the opinion filed by the trial judge will not take the place of the duly certified evidence, in the absence of an agreement that it contained all the facts concerning which evidence was given.

Argued March 9, 1905.

Appeal, No. 11, March T. 1905, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Lycoming Co., Dec. T., 1903, No. 263, for defendant non obstante veredicto in case of Mary Martha Hoff v. James Hamilton.

Before Rice, P. J., Beaver, Orlady, Smith, Porter and Henderson, JJ.

Affirmed.

Motion to suppress paper-hook and affirm the judgment.

*Frror assigned*was as follows : “ The court erred in entering judgment in favor of the defendant on the reserved point.”

*J. F.*Strieby, for appellant.

*Wm. R.*Deemer, with him *T. M. B.*Hicks, for appellee.

Per Curiam,

Upon the trial of this case the court reserved the question “ Whether there is any evidence in this case under which the plaintiff is entitled to recover'.” Subsequently the court entered judgment for the defendant non obstante veredicto on the question of law reserved, and thereupon the plaintiff took this appeal. It is objected by the appellee’s counsel that the single assignment of error is defective in that it does not set forth to tide m verbis the reserved question. But apart from this objection, the motion of appellee’s counsel to suppress the appellant’s paper-book and affirm the judgment must prevail, because the paper-book does not contain the evidence given on the trial. This is required by our rules, and is obviously essential to a proper decision of the question raised by the assignment of error. The recital of facts in the opinion filed by the *77trial judge will not take the place of the duly certified evidence, particularly as there is no agreement that it contains all the facts concerning which evidence was given.

The appellee’s motion is allowed, and the judgment is affirmed.
exhb101.htm


    
      
         


      

      
         


        
          

        

      

      
         


      

    


    Exhibit
10.1

    


    


    


    
      	
              l
      Warrants

            	
              Warrant
      Certificate No. l

            


    

    


     

    GEOGLOBAL
RESOURCES INC.

     

    (Incorporated
under the laws of Delaware)

     

    This is
to certify to ______________, the registered holder of the above Warrant
Certificate (the “Warrant”), that the Expiry Time of the Warrant has been
extended to 5:00 pm (Toronto time) on June 20, 2011.  In all other
respects the Warrant remains in full force and effect in accordance with the
terms set forth therein.  All terms used herein as defined terms shall
be defined as appears in the Warrant unless otherwise defined
herein.

    


    


    IN WITNESS WHEREOF the
Corporation has caused this Certification to be signed by its duly authorized
officer.

     

    


     

    DATED as
of the 26th day of
May, 2009.

     

    
      	 
      	 
      	
              GEOGLOBAL
      RESOURCES INC.

            
	 
      	 
      	
              Per:

            	
              /s/   Allan
      J. Kent

            
	 
      	 
      	 
      	
              Name:
      Allan J. Kent

            
	 
      	 
      	 
      	
              Title:
      Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
  Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-11380

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAUL GARATE-VELARDE, also known as Marco Antonio Sanchez-Velarde,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:16-CR-12-1

Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Raul Garate-Velarde has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Garate-Velarde has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and 

the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 20, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-11380 Document: 00514039773 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/20/2017
No. 16-11380

2

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-11380 Document: 00514039773 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/20/2017
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

1400 MARKET STREET, LLC 

 v. 

FOX FUNDING, LLC, FOX FUNDING PA 

LLC, MELO ENTERPRISES, LLC, 

DENNIS WASELUS AND ELSIE 

WASELUS, JOSEPH SINISI AND TWO 

RIVER COMMUNITY S/B/M THE TOWN 

BANK 

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

TWO RIVER COMMUNITY BANK S/B/M 

TO THE TOWN BANK 

 v. 

FOX FUNDING PA LLC 

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

 v. 

FOX FUNDING LLC, 1400 MARKET 

STREET, LLC 

PETITION OF: MELO ENTERPRISES, 

LLC 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 747 MAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 16th day of March, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED. 

MELO ENTERPRISES, LLC
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Tower Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Report), I, Andrew S. Samuel, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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 the operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the Report.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|      |  |              |  |     |  |                              
|----- |  | ------------ |  | --- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: |  | May 10, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ Andrew S. Samuel         
|      |  |              |  |     |  | Andrew S. Samuel             
|      |  |              |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|      |  |              |  |     |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2019 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2019

                    For the relief of Malia Miller.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 1, 2000

    Mr. Kyl introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                    For the relief of Malia Miller.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR MALIA MILLER.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Malia Miller shall be 
eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 
to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 
filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 
204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Malia Miller enters the United States 
before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), she shall be 
considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if 
otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of enactment 
of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status are filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Malia Miller, the Secretary of 
State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by one, during the 
current or next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant 
visas that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's 
birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, 
if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 
available to natives of the country of the alien's birth under section 
202(e) of such Act.
                                 <all>
```
Order entered February 18, 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-21-00600-CV

IN RE DAVID REISS AND SP Y GAMES, LLC, Relators

Original Proceeding from the 191st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-02498

ORDER Before Justices Molberg, Reichek, and Smith

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relators’ petition for

writ of mandamus. We also GRANT relators’ motion to strike, and we

accordingly STRIKE real party in interest’s February 7, 2022 sur-reply.

/s/ AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-50995

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Christopher Najera, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 7:22-CR-43-1

______________________________

Before Davis, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Christopher Najera has moved 

for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th 

Cir. 2011). Najera has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently 

developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Najera’s claims of 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 21, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-50995 Document: 00516865662 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/21/2023
No. 22-50995

2

ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims

without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 

829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the 

record reflected therein, as well as Najera’s response. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 22-50995 Document: 00516865662 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/21/2023
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 199 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 199

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  For the relief of Alexandre Malofienko, Olga Matsko, and their son, 
                          Vladimir Malofienko.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Alexandre 
Malofienko, Olga Matsko, and their son, Vladimir Malofienko, shall be 
held and considered to have been lawfully admitted to the United States 
for permanent residence as of the date of the enactment of this Act 
upon payment of the required visa fees.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

  Upon the granting of permanent residence to Alexandre Malofienko, 
Olga Matsko, and their son, Vladimir Malofienko, as provided in section 
1, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce 
by the appropriate number during the current fiscal year the total 
number of immigrant visas available to natives of the country of the 
aliens' birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)).

            Passed the Senate August 5, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 199

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  For the relief of Alexandre Malofienko, Olga Matsko, and their son, 
                          Vladimir Malofienko.
```