alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit (10)(a)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

  

  

  

  

  We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 75 to the 1933 Act
    Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-61554) and Amendment No. 706 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 13, 2019, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the registration of interests in a separate account under
    individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

  

  

  

  

  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

  

  

  

  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  September 6, 2019
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Autobytel Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the Report), we, James E. Riesenbach, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Monty A. Houdeshell, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ James E. RiesenbachJames E. RiesenbachChief Executive OfficerNovember 7, 2008




/s/ Monty A. HoudeshellMonty A. HoudeshellExecutive Vice President andChief Financial OfficerNovember 7, 2008


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Autobytel Inc. and will be retained by Autobytel
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
October 2 5 , 2016



### JUDGMENT



## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ENRIQUE TORRES , Appellant

NO. 14

- 16

- 00649

- CV V.

FIESTA MART, LLC F/K /A FIESTA MART, INC. , Appellee

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on July 19, 2016. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant, Enrique Torres.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
* 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. 98-40731 Conference Calendar

WILLIE A. MILTON ET AL., Plaintiffs, WILLIE A. MILTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus WAYNE SCOTT, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

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

USDC No. G-96-CV-361

- - - - - - - - - - April 16, 1999 Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Willie A. Milton, Texas state prisoner #561014, appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which reliefNo. 98-40731 - 2 - could be granted. Milton argues that he was retaliated against for acting as a jailhouse lawyer for a fellow inmate. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Milton v.
Scott , G-96-361 (S.D. Tex. May 15, 1998). To the extent that Milton also raised a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act, he has abandoned such claim on appeal. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). The appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. With the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous and the dismissal by the district court, along with the dismissal of Milton’s appeal in Sharp v. Scott , No. 98-40720, Milton now has eight “strikes” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Milton is reminded that he is barred from filing any civil action or appeal in forma pauperis unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. § 1915(g). See Davis v. Scott , Nos. 98-40689 & 98-40695 (5th Cir. Feb. 10, 1999) (unpublished).
APPEAL DISMISSED; APPELLANT BARRED. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Exhibit (10)(a)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

  

  

  

  

  We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 51 to the 1933 Act
    Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-138190) and Amendment No. 702 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 13, 2019, with respect to the
    consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the registration of interests in a separate account under
    individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

  

  

  

  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

  

  

  

  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  September 6, 2019
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-20177

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE GARCIA, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:09-CR-365-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, CLEMENT, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Jose Garcia, Jr., 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). 

Garcia has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant

portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Garcia’s response. We concur

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

appellate review. 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 16, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 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.

Case: 10-20177 Document: 00511573390 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/16/2011
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1095

To clarify the tax treatment of payments made under the Cerro Grande

Fire Assistance Act.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 19, 2001

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To clarify the tax treatment of payments made under the

Cerro Grande Fire Assistance Act.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME FOR PAY4 MENTS UNDER CERRO GRANDE FIRE ASSIST5 ANCE ACT.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 104(d) of the Cerro

7 Grande Fire Assistance Act (Public Law 106–246; 114

8 Stat. 585) is amended by adding at the end the following

9 new paragraph:
2

•HR 1095 IH

1 ‘‘(5) PAYMENTS EXCLUDED FROM GROSS IN2 COME.—

3 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of the

4 Internal Revenue Code of 1986, gross income

5 shall not include any amount of any payment

6 under this title not otherwise excludable from

7 gross income under such Code.

8 ‘‘(B) DENIAL OF DOUBLE BENEFIT.—Sub9 paragraph (A) shall not apply to any amount if

10 under such Code—

11 ‘‘(i) a deduction or credit is allowed

12 with respect to such amount, or

13 ‘‘(ii) an increase in the adjusted basis

14 of any property results from such

15 amount.’’.

16 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

17 this section shall take effect as if included in the enact18 ment of the Cerro Grande Fire Assistance Act.

Æ
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

###### Disaster Declaration #11418 and #11419 

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration. 

# ACTION:

Amendment 4. 

# SUMMARY:

                        This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-1786-DR), dated 09/02/2008.                               ( print page 54654)    

*Incident:*                         Hurricane Gustav.                     

*Incident Period:*                         09/01/2008 and continuing through 09/11/2008.                     

*Effective Date:*                         09/11/2008.                     

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/03/2008.                     

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/02/2009.                     

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to:  U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road,  Fort Worth, TX 76155. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance,  U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of Louisiana, dated 09/02/2008 is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 09/01/2008 and continuing through 09/11/2008. 

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell, 

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. E8-22024 Filed 9-19-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Exhibit








Exhibit 10(h)(vi)
AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE
TO THE
HARRIS CORPORATION 
SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN


WHEREAS, Harris Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), heretofore has adopted and maintains the Harris Corporation Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, as amended and restated effective March 1, 2003 (the “Plan”);
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.1 of the Plan, the Employee Benefits Committee of the Corporation (the “Employee Benefits Committee”) has the authority to adopt non-material amendments to the Plan;
WHEREAS, the Employee Benefits Committee desires to amend the Plan to clarify its provisions regarding maintenance of a grantor trust following a Change in Control of the Corporation; and
WHEREAS, the Employee Benefits Committee has determined that the above-described amendment is non-material.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan hereby is amended to insert the following new sentences immediately prior to the final sentence of Section 6.7:
For the avoidance of doubt, neither this Section 6.7 nor any other provision of this SERP shall obligate the continued maintenance of a grantor trust with respect to the SERP, and the Corporation may revoke any grantor trust it may establish for any reason and at any time (including following a Change in Control) in accordance with the provisions of such trust.  In the event of any such revocation, the Corporation shall satisfy from its general assets any SERP benefit that becomes due.
APPROVED by the HARRIS CORPORATION EMPLOYEE BENEFITS COMMITTEE on this 28th day of February, 2019.
/s/ James Girard        
James Girard, Chairperson
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1555

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the deduction

for meal and entertainment expenses of small businesses.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 24, 2001

Mr. FOLEY (for himself, Mr. TANNER, and Mr. MCCRERY) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase

the deduction for meal and entertainment expenses of

small businesses.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SMALL BUSINESSES ALLOWED INCREASED DE4 DUCTION FOR MEAL AND ENTERTAINMENT

5 EXPENSES.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (n) of section 274 of

7 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to only 50

8 percent of meal and entertainment expenses allowed as de9 duction) is amended by adding at the end the following

10 new paragraph:
2

•HR 1555 IH

1 ‘‘(4) SPECIAL RULE FOR SMALL BUSINESSES.—

2 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any

3 taxpayer which is a small business, paragraph

4 (1) shall be applied by substituting ‘the applica5 ble percentage (as defined in paragraph

6 (3)(B))’ for ‘50 percent’.

7 ‘‘(B) SMALL BUSINESS.—For purposes of

8 this paragraph, the term ‘small business’

9 means, with respect to expenses paid or in10 curred during any taxable year—

11 ‘‘(i) any C corporation which meets

12 the requirements of section 55(e)(1) for

13 such year, and

14 ‘‘(ii) any S corporation, partnership,

15 or sole proprietorship which would meet

16 such requirements if it were a C corpora17 tion.’’

18 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

19 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after

20 December 31, 2001.

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

MATEO DEMATEOJUAN,

Petitioner, 

vs. 

ROB JEFFREYS,

Respondent.

8:23CV184

ORDER

This matter is before the Court for case management. Petitioner was ordered to 

file and serve a brief in opposition to the Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment, 

Filing No. 11. See Filing No. 5. Petitioner’s brief was due on July 24, 2024, and has not 

been filed with the Court. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner shall file his brief in response to the Respondent’s Answer and 

Brief on or before August 28, 2024. Otherwise, the matter will be ripe for consideration. 

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline 

using the following text: August 28, 2024: check for Petitioner’s brief.

Dated this 29th day of July, 2024.

BY THE COURT:

Joseph F. Bataillon

Senior United States District Judge

8:23-cv-00184-JFB-PRSE Doc # 15 Filed: 07/29/24 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 149
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Raymond Ngankou

v. Civil No. 06-cv-309-JD

United States of America

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The petitioner has filed a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

2255 in which he raises two issues with respect to his claim for

ineffective assistance of counsel:

1. No appeal was filed on his behalf as requested;

2. He was advised to take the government’s offer of a

sentence of 120 months in return for dropping his objections to

an enhancement for being an organizer, leader, manager, or

supervisor.

The court has determined that an evidentiary hearing on

these two issues would be helpful in resolving this petition. 

The clerk shall schedule a hearing at which the defendant and

Attorney Saxe shall be present.

Counsel is appointed to represent the petitioner at the

hearing.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

November 20, 2006

cc: Aixa Maldonado-Quinones, Esquire

Robert J. Veiga, Esquire

Raymond Ngankou 

Case 1:06-cv-00309-JD Document 8 Filed 11/20/06 Page 1 of 1
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 22, 2019

No. 04-18-00551-CV

James Brent MANSFIELD,

Appellant

v.

Stormie Rae MANSFIELD,

Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017-CI-17710

Honorable Stephani A. Walsh, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s attorney has filed a motion seeking access to a portion of the record that is 

sealed. Specifically, appellant’s attorney seeks access to Petitioner’s exhibit 1, which is included 

in the reporter’s record from the hearing that took place in this case on April 10, 2018. The 

motion is GRANTED. The clerk of the court is instructed to provide a copy of the requested 

portion of the sealed record, Petitioner’s exhibit 1, to appellant’s attorney and appellee’s attorney 

on CD-ROM. All parties and their attorneys are ORDERED not to share the contents of this

sealed record with any person except to the extent necessary to prepare their respective briefs.

In the event appellant or appellee reference the sealed record in their respective briefs, 

they are ORDERED to (1) file their respective briefs in paper form only, and (2) with a cover 

letter informing the clerk of this court that the brief references the sealed record. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 9.2(c)(3) (exception to electronic filing for documents under seal).

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

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

court on this 22nd day of January, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
Case 1:06-cv-00228-PB   Document 11   Filed 10/10/06   Page 1 of 1
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 20
- 00099
- CR

Justin Edward Panus, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 368TH DISTR ICT COURT OF WILLIAM SON COUNTY NO. 16
- 2610
- K368, TH E HONORABLE RICK J. KENNON, JUDGE PRESID I N G

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

PER CURIAM Justin Edward Panus , acting pro se, has appeal ed the distr ict court ’ s denial of his motion for po stconviction forensic DNA testing. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 64.01

- .05

. H o wever , our review of the r ecord reflects that the ruling on Panus ’ s motion is not signed and consist s only of a handwritten notation at the b ottom o f the motion stating “ denied. ” 1 A written and signed appealable order is a prerequisit e to invoking our appellate jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1) ; State v. Rosenbaum , 818 S.W.2 d 398, 402 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) ; Dewalt v.
State , 417 S.W.3d 678, 685 n.32 (Tex. App.

— Austin 2013 , pet. ref ’ d )

.

1 T he clerk ’ s record case summary has a “ Judge ’ s Docket Entry ” dated “ 01/17/ 2020 ” stating “ R evie w of Motion for DNA Te s ting: Motion Denied (RK )

. ” But that entry does not substitute for a signed order on the motion

. Dewalt v. State , 417 S.W.3d 678, 685 n.32 (Tex. App.

— Austin 2013, pet. ref’d) ( noting that docket

- sheet entries do not qualify as appealable orders).2 Accordin gly, t h is appeal is abated and the cause is remanded to the distr i ct court for entry of a signed order as to Panus ’s motion for forensic DNA testing

. See Ex parte Crenshaw , 25 S.W.3d 761, 76 4 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 2000 , pet. ref ’ d ) (noting that court had previously abated appeal b ecause record di d not contain written order reflecting court ’ s ruling); se e also Sturgis v. State , No. 05

- 08

- 00006

- CR, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 2045, at *4

- 5 (Tex. App.

— Dallas Mar. 24, 2010 , pet. ref ’d) (mem. op. ) (noting that court had previously aba t ed appeal because a t tim e of appeal , trial cour t had not signed written order denying defendant ’s motion for DNA testing ). A supplemental clerk’s record containing th e signed order is to be prepared and forwarded to this Court no later than April 30, 202 0

. It is so ordered M arch 31, 2020

.

Before Chief Justice Ro s e, Justices Baker and Triana Abated and Remanded Filed: M arch 31, 2020 Do Not Publish
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-143-PB

Juan Soto-Mejia

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the January 9, 2007 

trial in the above case, citing the need for additional time to

engage in plea negotiations in this matter. The government does

not object to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, to allow the parties additional time to

negotiate a plea agreement or properly prepare for trial, the

court will continue the trial from January 9, 2007 to March 6,

2007. In agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds

pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated

reasons, the ends of justice served in granting a continuance

outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a

speedy trial.

Case 1:06-cr-00143-PB Document 11 Filed 12/20/06 Page 1 of 2
2

The December 19, 2006 final pretrial conference is continued

to February 22, 2007 at 3:30 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

December 20, 2006

cc: Jeffrey Levin, Esq.

Robert Veiga, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00143-PB Document 11 Filed 12/20/06 Page 2 of 2