alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 10, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50591 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ISAAC FELIPE CARRILLO-ANDRADE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-03-CR-57-ALL-PRM

-------------------- Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Isaac Felipe Carrillo-Andrade appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Carrillo-Andrade complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on a prior conviction. He argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional. Carrillo-Andrade thus contends that his sentence should not exceed the two-year maximum terms ofNo. 03-50591 -2- imprisonment and supervised release prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Carrillo-Andrade acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
#### David L. Von Moppes v. Philip Leimbach and others. Justin Wertheimer v. The Same. Gustav Kuhn v. The Same.

Order reversed, motion granted wich ten dollars costs in one case and the disbursements in each. Opinion by

Brady, J.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 7961]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3324]



[[Page 7961]]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Docket No. RP94-343-000]


NorAm Gas Transmission Co.; Notice of Informal Settlement 
Conference

February 6, 1995.
    Take notice that an informal settlement conference will be convened 
in this proceeding on February 23, 1995, at 10:00 a.m., at the offices 
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 810 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, for the purpose of exploring the possible 
settlement of the above-referenced docket.
    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant as 
defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b) is invited to attend. Persons wishing to 
become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status 
pursuant to the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 385.214).
    For additional information, contact Donald Williams at (202) 208-
0743 or Irene Szopo at (202) 208-1602.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-3324 Filed 2-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0559

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CAMERON J. EAGLEMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including May 21, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 16 2021

04/16/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0559
* 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. 98-60018 Summary Calendar

ZOLTAN SZABO,

Petitioner,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent..

- - - - - - - - - - Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals USDC No. A70-802-521

- - - - - - - - - - November 17, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Zoltan Szabo, an ethnic Hungarian who is a native and citizen

of Romania, has petitioned this court to review the Board of

Immigration Appeal’s (BIA) determination that he should be

deported. We DENY Szabo’s petition. The BIA’s decision was

supported by “reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on

the record considered as a whole.” C arbajal-Gonzalez v. INS

, 78

F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996).No. 98-60018 -2-

Assuming Szabo has established that he was previously

persecuted in Romania, State Department documents introduced in

Szabo’s immigr ation proceedings were sufficient to overcome the

presumption that he has a reasonable fear of present or future

persecution. S ee 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(1)(i); Vaduva v. INS

, 131

F.3d 689, 691-92 (7th Cir. 1997). The BIA did not err in

determining that Szabo was not entitled to asylum under the

doctrine articulated in Matter of Chen , 20 I&N Dec. 16 (BIA April

25, 1989), and its factual determinations in ruling on this matter

w ere supported by substantial evidence. S ee Rivera-Cruz v. I NS

,

948 F.2d 962, 969 (5th Cir. 1991).

PETITION DENIED.
Exhibit 10.1


Amendment
#4

to

Convertible Promissory Note


 


This AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”)
is entered into by and between Company and Holder (each as defined below), effective as of December 29, 2022 (the “Effective
Date”), binding on the undersigned parties as of that date.


 


RECITALS


 


Odyssey Group Intl, Inc. (“Company”)
and LGH Investments, LLC (“Holder”) entered into that certain Convertible Promissory Note (the “Note”)
dated April 5, 2021 in the amount of $1,050,000.00 (the “Loan Amount”). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined have
the meaning set forth in the Note.


 


Whereas,
the parties have agreed to extend the maturity date of the Note subject to the conditions contained herein.


 


AGREEMENT


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration
of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


1.             
Extension of Maturity Date. The Maturity Date of the Note is amended and extended to March 31, 2022.


 


2.             
Compensation for Extension. In exchange for the extension of the Maturity Date, $50,000.00 shall be added to
the principal amount outstanding on the Note between the Company and Holder as of the Effective Date hereof.


 


3.             Note Payment.
The Company shall pay to Holder $35,000 (thirty-five thousand) on or before December 30th, 2022. This payment will reduce the Note balance
by $35,000 (thirty-five thousand).


 


4.             
Effectiveness; Conflict. Except as modified hereby, the Note and terms thereof shall remain in full force and
effect. On and after the effectiveness of this Amendment, each reference in the Notes to “this Agreement,” “hereunder,”
“hereof,” “herein” or words of like import shall mean and be a reference to the Note, as amended by this Amendment.
To the extent the terms of this Amendment conflict with any provision of the Note or any of the documents referenced therein, then the
provisions of this Amendment shall control.


 


5.             
Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed by facsimile transmission and in counterparts, each of which
shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties
hereto have executed this Amendment as of the Effective Date.


 


	 	COMPANY
	 	ODYSSEY GROUP INTL, INC.
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ /J. Michael Redmond
	 	 	Chief Executive Officer
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	HOLDER
	 	LGH INVESTMENTS, LLC
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Lucas G. Hoppel
	 	 	Managing Member


 


 


 


 


 


 


[Signature
Page to Amendment No 4. to the Convertible Promissory Note]
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-05-009-CV

ROBERT L. HARR 	APPELLANT

	V.

RICHARD CHARLES ALLEN  	APPELLEE

	----------

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	On April 11, 2005, we notified appellant that his brief had not been filed as required by rule 38.6(a).  See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a).  We stated we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless appellant or any party desiring to continue this appeal filed with the court within ten days a motion reasonably explaining the failure to file a brief and the need for an extension.  See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 38.8(a)(1). We have not received any response.

	Because appellant’s brief has not been filed, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.  See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b).

								PER CURIAM 		

PANEL D:	HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED: May 19, 2005
Exhibit 99.1



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 of LTC Properties, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Alan J. Zampini, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                           
|---------------------------
|/s/    ALAN J.
ZAMPINI     
|Alan J. ZampiniMay 14, 2003



|NOTE: |  | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to LTC Properties, Inc. and will be retained by LTC Properties, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|----- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>            5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
condensed consolidated balance sheets and the condensed, consolidated
statements of operations of Forever Enterprises, Inc. filed as part
of Forever Enterprises, Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended June 30, 2000, and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such report.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                      20,862,751
<SECURITIES>                               103,038,339
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,552,765
<ALLOWANCES>                                    89,820
<INVENTORY>                                    406,137
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           154,420,288
<PP&E>                                      11,291,686
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,614,733
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             213,272,349
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,623,558
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                        69,334
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,755,120
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               213,272,349
<SALES>                                     27,823,285
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            34,893,911
<CGS>                                        1,207,110
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               36,483,041
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               261,675
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             208,744
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,327,455)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (427,163)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (900,292)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (900,292)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.13)


</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00747-CR

Ryan Christopher Wickerham, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

NO. 12-02207-1, THE HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Ryan Christopher Wickerham has filed a pro se motion to dismiss this

appeal. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).

1

__________________________________________

Melissa Goodwin, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: September 19, 2014

Do Not Publish

Appellant appeals, pro se, his conviction for family-violence assault. See Tex. Penal Code 1

§ 22.01(a)(1); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.013. The record reflects that appellant chose to

represent himself at trial and continues to do so on appeal, despite repeated admonishments from the

trial court prior to trial and prior to this appeal of the dangers and disadvantages of

self-representation. See U.S. Const. amend. VI, XIV; Tex. Const. art. I, § 10; Faretta v. California,

422 U.S. 806 (1975).
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 36 (Thursday, February 23, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 10142]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4388]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Fiscal Service
[Dept. Circ. 570, 1994 Rev., Supp. No. 9; 4-00236]


Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: Chartwell 
Reinsurance Company

    A Certificate of Authority as an acceptable surety on Federal Bonds 
is hereby issued to the following company under Sections 9304 to 9308, 
Title 31, of the United States Code, effective January 30, 1995. 
Federal bond-approving officers should annotate their reference copies 
of the Treasury Circular 570, 1994 Revision, on page 34148 to reflect 
this addition:

    Chartwell Reinsurance Company. Business Address: 300 Atlantic 
Street, Suite 400, Stamford, CT 06901 Telephone No. (203) 961-7300. 
Underwriting Limitation b/: $8,110,000. Surety Licenses c/: AL, AK, 
AZ, CA, DE, DC, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NJ, 
NM, NY, ND, OH, PA, TN, TX, UT, WA, WV, WI, WY. Incorporated In: 
Minnesota.

    Certificates of Authority expire on June 30 each year, unless 
revoked prior to that date. The Certificates are subject to subsequent 
annual renewal as long as the companies remain qualified (31 CFR Part 
223). A list of qualified companies is published annually as of July 1 
in Treasury Department Circular 570, with details as to underwriting 
limitations, areas in which licensed to transact surety business and 
other information.
    Copies of the Circular may be obtained from the Surety Bond Branch, 
Funds Management Division, Financial Management Service, Department of 
the Treasury, Hyattsville, MD 20782, Telephone (202) 874-6696.

    Dated: February 15, 1995.
Charles F. Schwan III,
Director, Funds Management Division, Financial Management Services.
[FR Doc. 95-4388 Filed 2-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 32.1

           SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, David R. Odenath, Jr., Chief Executive
Officer and President of American Skandia Life Assurance Corporation (the
"Company"), hereby certify that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for
the year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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
Company.

Dated: February 9, 2006

                                           /s/ David R. Odenath, Jr.
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Name:  David R. Odenath, Jr.
                                           Title: Chief Executive Officer and
                                                  President

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.
Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

Long-range 

actuarial 

balance

Annual 

balance in 

75th year

-3.61 -4.35 0.59 0.87 16% 20%

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2023 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actuary

Social Security Administration

September 15, 2023

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Level of Monthly Benefits

Current law

[percent of payroll]

Change from current law

[percent of payroll] Shortfall eliminated

Proposed Provision: B4.3. For the OASI and DI computation of the PIA, gradually reduce the maximum 

number of drop-out years from 5 to 0, phased in over the years 2025-2033.

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Income rates under current law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under current law

Cost rates with this provision

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Current law With this provision
EXHIBIT 31.2

     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, A. Mark Young, certify that:

      (1)   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of E Com Ventures,
            Inc.;

      (2)   Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  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 annual report.


Date: May 24, 2006


By:  /S/ A.MARK YOUNG
   ----------------------------------
A. Mark Young
Chief Financial Officer
### Proposed Provision: B7.14. Eliminate completely the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO), effective 2024.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 11, 2021

No. 04-20-00402-CV

CITY OF LAREDO,

Appellant

v.

Brenda SANCHEZ, Individually and as next friend of R.S., minor,

Appellee

From the 341st Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CVA001672D3

Honorable Rebecca Ramirez Palomo, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Retired Chief Justice, Sandee Bryan Marion (not participating)

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice 

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice 

The panel has considered the Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing, and the motion is 

DENIED. 

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

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

court on this 11th day of January, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9830-9831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4309]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy


State Energy Advisory Board

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Public Law 92-463; 86 Stat. 770), notice is hereby given of the 
following meeting: State Energy Advisory Board.

    Date and Time: March 22-23, 1995 from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
    Place: The Madison Hotel, 15th and M Streets, Washington, DC, 
20005.
    Contact: William J. Raup, Office of Technical and Financial 
Assistance (EE-50), Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585, Telephone 202/586-2214.
    Purpose of the Board: To make recommendations to the Assistant 
Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy regarding goals 
and objectives and programmatic and administrative policies, and to 
otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as designated in 
the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 1990 (P.L. 
101-440).
    Tentative Agenda: Briefings on, and discussions of:
    <bullet> The report ``Alternative Futures for the Department of 
Energy National Laboratories,'' prepared by the Secretary of Energy 
Advisory Board (Galvin Task Force).
    <bullet> The FY 1996 Federal budget request for Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy programs.
    <bullet> Review and approval of current Board Annual Report.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact William J. Raup at the 
address or telephone number listed above. Requests to make oral 
presentations must be received five days prior to the meeting; 
reasonable provision will be made to include the statements in the 
agenda. The Chair of the Board is empowered to conduct the meeting 
in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public 
review and copying [[Page 9831]] within 30 days at the Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Issued at Washington, DC, on February 16, 1995.
Gail Cephas,
Acting Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-4309 Filed 2-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P