alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
226 La. 57

#### STATE of Louisiana v. David CARTER.

No. 41825.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 2, 1954.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 5, 1954.

Neal N. Bagwell and Harrison G. Bag-well, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant.

Fred S. LeBlanc, Atty. Gen., M. E. Cul-ligan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Joseph A. Sims, Dist. Atty., Hammond, Grover L. Coving-ton, Asst. Dist. Atty., Kentwood, Erlo J. Durbin, Asst. Dist. Atty., Denham Springs, for appellee.

MOISE, Justice.

The defendant was convicted and sentenced by the court to four years in the State Penitentiary for the theft of a cow. Article 67.1, Louisiana Criminal Code, LSA-R.S. 14:67.1.

When the appeal was called for hearing before this Court, none of the Bills of Exception were argued orally, nor has a brief been filed by the defendant.

The rule of law is that, under circumstances such as these, the presumption is that the appeal has been abandoned. State v. Latino, 138 La. 14, 69 So. 857; State v. Ducre, 173 La. 438, 137 So. 745; State v. Simpson, 216 La. 212, 43 So.2d 585; State v. De Soto, 221 La. 624, 60 So.2d 65; State v. Weaver, 222 La. 148, 62 So.2d 255.

*903This being a criminal case, we have made a most careful examination of the record, and we find no prejudicial error.

For the reasons assigned, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RAFAEL GARCIA-FRANCO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-72512

Agency No. A095-310-031

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 26, 2012** 

Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

Rafael Garcia-Franco, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for

review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals, denying as untimely

filed and numerically barred, petitioner’s second motion to reopen removal

FILED

JUN 29 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-72512

proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of

discretion, Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny

the petition for review.

Garcia-Franco contends that he merits cancellation of removal relief because

his United States citizen children will experience the requisite hardship if he is

removed to Mexico.

By not raising any arguments concerning the BIA’s dispositive

determination that his second motion to reopen was numerically-barred and

untimely, Garcia-Franco has waived any challenge to that determination. See

Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996). Moreover, the

BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Garcia-Franco’s second motion to

reopen as numerically-barred and untimely where the motion was filed over six

years after the BIA’s final order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
<PAGE>
 
                      SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                            WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                               FORM 10-K/A-NO. 1
                                        

/X/  Annual Report pursuant to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
     Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1997.

/ /  Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
     Exchange Act of 1934 for the transition period from .................... to
     .......................


                        Commission File Number 0-13617



                            LIFELINE SYSTEMS, INC.
            (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)


           MASSACHUSETTS                                 04-2537528
  (State or Other Jurisdiction of          (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
   Incorporation or Organization)     


  640 MEMORIAL DRIVE, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS               02139 
    (Address of Principal Executive Offices)               (Zip Code)



       Registrant's telephone number, including area code (617) 679-1000



     The sole purpose of this Form 10K/A is to file Annual Reports on Form 11-K
     for Lifeline's Employee Savings and Investment Plans.

     Pursuant to the requirements of Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act
     of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this amendment to be signed on its
     behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


LIFELINE SYSTEMS, INC. (REGISTRANT)


     /s/ Dennis M. Hurley


BY   Dennis M. Hurley
     Vice President, Finance
     Chief Financial Officer

DATE August 5, 1998
<PAGE>
 
PAGE 1

                                 EXHIBIT INDEX



Exhibit No.  Exhibit

(99.1)       Annual Report for the Lifeline Employees' Savings and Investment
             Plan
(99.1a)      Consent of Independent Public Accountants
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.4


      [FORM OF 1998 STOCK OPTION PLAN RIGHTS TERMINATION LETTER AGREEMENT
            OF DIRECTORS TO CANCEL OPTIONS DATED FEBRUARY 4, 2000]


February 4, 2000

[Director]
GlobalSCAPE, Inc.

     Re:  GlobalSCAPE, Inc. 1998 Stock Option Plan (the "Stock Option Plan")

Dear [Director]:

     On April 30, 1999 you and GlobalSCAPE, Inc. ("GlobalSCAPE") signed a letter
under which GlobalSCAPE granted you an option to purchase 1000 shares of
GlobalSCAPE common stock for $0.10 (ten cents) per share with the Option vesting
on January 1, 1999; and on July 1, 1999, you and GlobalSCAPE signed a letter
under which GlobalSCAPE granted you an option to purchase 1000 shares of
GlobalSCAPE common stock for $0.10 (ten cents) per share with the option vesting
on May 13, 1999 (the April 30, 1999 grant and July 1, 1999 grant referred to
collectively as the "Option").

     On January 18, 2000, the Board of Directors of GlobalSCAPE and American
Telesource International, Inc. ("ATSI") approved a distribution and offering of
shares of GlobalSCAPE common Stock (the "Financing Plan").

     To resolve various issues arising in connection with the Stock Option Plan
and to facilitate the Financing Plan, the Board of Directors of GlobalSCAPE has
resolved to cancel the Option as well as certain options issued to other
directors and employees of GlobalSCAPE. We ask you to acknowledge that you
agree that it is in the best interest of GlobalSCAPE, and therefore your best
interest as an option holder, to cancel the Option, and that you will not make
any claim against GlobalSCAPE or ATSI with respect to the cancellation of the
Option.

     Please sign this letter where indicated below and return it to me to
acknowledge your agreement.

                                        Sincerely,


                                        Secretary
                                        H. Douglas Saathoff

Agreed:

-----------------------------
       [Director]

       Date:
            -----------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         820,979
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             3,870,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  1,854,517
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       3,287,801
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        262,661
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,066,450
<DEPOSITS>                                   2,024,674
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             40,073
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,707,720
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,293,983
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              11,066,450
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,485
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              120,446
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                51,262
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               174,193
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,188
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,075
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          149,118
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    5,400
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                413,811
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (268,596)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   (268,596)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (268,596)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,400
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          5,400
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable R. Brooke Jackson

Civil Action No. 11-CV-2509-RBJ-KLM

JANE KOEWING,

Plaintiff,

v.

CH2M HILL, INC.,

Defendant.

ORDER TO SET SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. The parties are ordered to set an initial 

scheduling conference in this Court (with Judge Jackson) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and 

D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.1 no later than 45 days after all responsive pleadings are filed. Each 

party’s lead trial counsel shall attend the conference. The conference shall be held in Courtroom 

A-702, Alfred A. Arraj U.S. Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado. The parties are 

directed to jointly contact Mary DeRosa by telephone at (303) 844-4694 or by email at 

Jackson_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov to obtain a scheduling conference date. 

A meeting for the purposes of attempting to agree on a scheduling order and satisfying 

the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) should be held no later than 21 days before the 

proposed scheduling order is tendered. The proposed scheduling order, which should be 

prepared as described in Appendix F to the local rules, should be tendered no later than five days 

before the scheduling conference. The proposed scheduling order should set forth the parties’

agreement or their respective positions on the matters set forth in Appendix F. A copy of 

instructions for the preparation of a scheduling order and a form scheduling order can be 

downloaded from the Court’s website (http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/Forms.aspx).

DATED this 12th day of October, 2011.

BY THE COURT: 

___________________________________

R. Brooke Jackson

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02509-RBJ-KLM Document 4 Filed 10/12/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Hycor Biomedical Inc. and subsidiaries on Form S-8 Nos. 33-25427, 33-25428,
33-25429, 33-25430, 33-32767, 33-43280, 33-63798 and 33-63800 of our report
dated February 19, 1999, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hycor
Biomedical Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 1998.




/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP


Costa Mesa, California
March 26, 1999
#### Leonard Marmet, Plaintiff, *v.*Edwin D. Rankins, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Oneida County,

February 20, 1957.

*317
      *Leon J. Marketos*for defendant.

*James P. O’Donnell & Sons*for plaintiff.

Frank Del Vecchio, J.

This is a motion to dismiss the complaint in the above-entitled action upon the ground that the claim has been assigned by operation of section 29 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law to the New England Insurance Company and that plaintiff is therefore not the real party in interest.

On the argument plaintiff’s attorney conceded the assignment but made a cross motion to substitute the insurance carrier in place of the individual plaintiff.

The cause of action alleged in the complaint arose on October 15, 1953, approximately three years and three months prior to the motions. Plaintiff relies however upon *Lehman*v. *Hartke*(286 App. Div. 661, 665) which is authority that *“*the workmen’s compensation carrier may be substituted as the plaintiff in an action brought by the injured person, upon appropriate motion, even though the Statute of Limitations has run against a new action by the carrier.”

Defendant’s brief contains arguments questioning the wisdom of the *Lehman*decision, pointing out that the injured employee may receive only two thirds of any recovery in excess of the payments already made by the carrier and that his interest is contingent in nature since the carrier may settle the action for the amount of its payments if it so elects.

These arguments do not serve to weaken the *Lehman*holding in the opinion of this court. On the contrary, since the injured employee does have an interest — partial and contingent though it may be — in any recovery in excess of payments made by the carrier which might be received, there is a sound basis for permitting a continuance of the action commenced by him within the statutory time limited, substituting the carrier as plaintiff therein.

The motion to dismiss the complaint is therefore denied and the motion to substitute the New England Insurance Company in place of the plaintiff Leonard Marmet is granted.

Order accordingly.
|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  | 06/19/2012 |   |                                                       |   |
|--------|------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |       |   |                                                       |   |
|   |       |   | /s/ FRANK D. ROMEJKO                                       |   |
|   |       |   | Frank D. Romejko                                           |   |
|   |       |   | Vice President of Finance,Chief Financial Officer (Acting) |   |
Case 1:11-cv-02544-MSK-KLM   Document 50   Filed 05/09/14   USDC Colorado   Page 1 of 7

Case 1:11-cv-02544-MSK-KLM   Document 50   Filed 05/09/14   USDC Colorado   Page 2 of 7

Case 1:11-cv-02544-MSK-KLM   Document 50   Filed 05/09/14   USDC Colorado   Page 3 of 7

Case 1:11-cv-02544-MSK-KLM   Document 50   Filed 05/09/14   USDC Colorado   Page 4 of 7

Case 1:11-cv-02544-MSK-KLM   Document 50   Filed 05/09/14   USDC Colorado   Page 5 of 7

Case 1:11-cv-02544-MSK-KLM   Document 50   Filed 05/09/14   USDC Colorado   Page 6 of 7

Case 1:11-cv-02544-MSK-KLM   Document 50   Filed 05/09/14   USDC Colorado   Page 7 of 7
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1243 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to reduce the age for receipt of 

military retired pay for nonregular service from 60 years of age to 

55 years of age. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2007 

Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. MENENDEZ, and Mr. DURBIN) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 

Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to reduce the age 

for receipt of military retired pay for nonregular service 

from 60 years of age to 55 years of age. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REDUCTION IN AGE FOR RECEIPT OF MILITARY 

4 RETIRED PAY FOR NONREGULAR SERVICE. 

5 (a) REDUCTION IN AGE.—Section 12731(a)(1) of 

6 title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘at 

7 least 60 years of age’’ and inserting ‘‘at least 55 years 

8 of age’’. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•S 1243 IS

1 (b) APPLICATION TO EXISTING PROVISIONS OF LAW

2 OR POLICY.—With respect to any provision of law, or of 

3 any policy, regulation, or directive of the executive branch 

4 that refers to a member or former member of the uni5 formed services as being eligible for, or entitled to, retired 

6 pay under chapter 1223 of title 10, United States Code, 

7 but for the fact that the member or former member is 

8 under 60 years of age, such provision shall be carried out 

9 with respect to that member or former member by sub10 stituting for the reference to being 60 years of age, a ref11 erence to the age in effect for qualification for such retired 

12 pay under section 12731(a) of title 10, United States 

13 Code, as amended by subsection (a). 

14 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

15 subsection (a) shall take effect on the first day of the first 

16 month beginning on or after the date of the enactment 

17 of this Act and shall apply to retired pay payable for that 

18 month and subsequent months. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 58979]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23817]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(i), the Attorney General shall, prior to 
issuing a registration under this Section to a bulk manufacturer of a 
controlled substance in schedule I or II, and prior to issuing a 
regulation under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2) authorizing the importation of 
such a substance, provide manufacturers holding registrations for the 
bulk manufacture of the substance an opportunity for a hearing.
    Therefore, in accordance with Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR), 1301.34(a), this is notice that on August 1, 2008, Clinical 
Supplies Management, Inc., 342 42nd Street, South Fargo, North Dakota 
58103, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement 
Administration (DEA) to be registered as an importer of Sufentanil 
(9740), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule II.
    The company plans to import the listed controlled substance for 
clinical trials, research, and analytical purposes.
    Any bulk manufacturer who is presently, or is applying to be, 
registered with DEA to manufacture such basic class of controlled 
substance may file comments or objections to the issuance of the 
proposed registration and may, at the same time, file a written request 
for a hearing on such application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43, and in 
such form as prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47.
    Any such comments or objections should be addressed, in 
quintuplicate, to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of 
Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), 8701 
Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and must be filed no 
later than November 7, 2008.
    This procedure is to be conducted simultaneously with, and 
independent of, the procedures described in 21 CFR Sec.  1301.34(b), 
(c), (d), (e), and (f). As noted in a previous notice published in the 
Federal Register on September 23, 1975, (40 FR 43745), all applicants 
for registration to import a basic class of any controlled substance in 
schedules I or II are, and will continue to be, required to demonstrate 
to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, 
Drug Enforcement Administration, that the requirements for such 
registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(a); 21 U.S.C. 823(a); and 21 CFR 
1301.34(b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) are satisfied.

    Dated: October 2, 2008.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
 [FR Doc. E8-23817 Filed 10-7-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
Case 1:11-cv-02430-WYD-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6
Case 1:11-cv-02430-WYD-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 6
Case 1:11-cv-02430-WYD-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 6
Case 1:11-cv-02430-WYD-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 6
Case 1:11-cv-02430-WYD-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 6
Case 1:11-cv-02430-WYD-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 6
Exhibit 10.2


 


 


POI ACQUISITION I, INC.


 


 


May 17, 2004


 


Protection One, Inc.


818 South Kansas Avenue


Topeka, Kansas 
66612


Attn:                    Darius G. Nevin


Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer


 


Dear Mr. Nevin:


 


We refer to the Equity Standstill Agreement, dated as of
February 17, 2004 (the “Agreement”), by and between Protection One, Inc.
and POI Acquisition I, Inc.  Capitalized
terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such
terms in the Agreement.


 


Pursuant to section 2.02 of the Agreement, the Agreement shall
terminate and be of no further force and effect on the Specified Date (which,
under clause (i), is May 17, 2004).  By
this letter and at your request, we hereby agree to amend the definition of the
Specified Date to mean the earlier of: 
(i) the date that is 97 days after the Effective Time; or (ii) the
occurrence of any Equity Standstill Termination Event.  Except as otherwise provided herein, the
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect subject to the terms and provisions
thereof.


 


This letter may be executed in counterparts.  Please confirm your agreement with the foregoing by signing and
returning to the undersigned the duplicate copy of this letter enclosed
herewith.


 


Very truly yours,


 


	
  POI ACQUISITION I, INC.

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/ David Tanner

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Name: David Tanner

  
	
  Title:

  	
   

  
				



 

















 


	
  Agreed as of the date first written above:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  PROTECTION ONE, INC.

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Darius G. Nevin

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Name: Darius G. Nevin

  	
   

  
	
  Title: Executive Vice President and

  	
   

  
	
  Chief Financial Officer