alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, January 23, 2020. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, January 23, 2020 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A20A0841. SAE SHIN et al. v. ROBERT J. FOGARTY.
The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this Court and with Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration of errors and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals Rule 13. On January 10, 2020, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors and a brief no later than January 21, 2020. As of the date of this order, the appellant's enumeration of errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed abandoned and is hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a).
Case 1:11-cv-01980-LTB Document 5 Filed 08/11/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-01980-LTB Document 5 Filed 08/11/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-01980-LTB Document 5 Filed 08/11/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-01980-LTB Document 5 Filed 08/11/11 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-01980-LTB Document 5 Filed 08/11/11 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 5
-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02530-RM-KLM

ALFONSO PACHECO,

Plaintiff,

v.

RAE TIMME, Warden, Fremont Correctional Facility,

TOM CLEMENT, DOC Executive Director, and

ANTHONY A. DECESARO, Step 3 Grievance Officer, 

All in both their individual and official capacities,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________

MINUTE ORDER

_____________________________________________________________________

ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint [Docket

No. 36; Filed May 28, 2013] (the “Motion”). At the time Plaintiff filed this action, Rae Timme

was the Warden at Fremont Correctional Facility, and Tom Clements was the Executive

Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections. Lou Archuleta is now the Warden at

Fremont Correctional Facility, and Roger Werholtz is the Interim Executive Director of the

Colorado Department of Corrections. See Defendants’ Motion for Enlargement of Time to

Produce Responses to Plaintiff’s Discovery Requests [#39] at 1 nn. 1 & 2. Pursuant to Fed.

R. Civ. P. 25(d), these parties are automatically substituted as parties with respect to the

official capacity claims. However, Plaintiff may not automatically substitute these

Defendants with respect to the individual capacity claims, which attach to the individual

person named and not to the office each previously held. See Nahno-Lopez v. Houser, 627

F. Supp. 2d 1269, 1284 (W.D. Okla. 2009); White v. Okla. ex rel. Tulda Cnty. Office of Dist.

Attorney, 250 F. Supp. 2d 1319, 1329 (N.D. Okla. 2002). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#36] is GRANTED in part. Accordingly,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall amend the electronic

docket to substitute present Defendant “Rae Timme, Warden, Fremont Correctional

Facility” with Defendant “Lou Archuleta, Warden, Fremont Correctional Facility.”

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall amend the electronic

Case 1:11-cv-02530-RM-KLM Document 42 Filed 07/12/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
-2-

docket to substitute present Defendant “Tom Clement, DOC Executive Director” with

Defendant “Roger Werholtz, Interim Executive Director of the Colorado Department of

Corrections.”

Defendant Rae Timme in her individual capacity and Defendant Tom Clements in

his individual capacity shall remain as named Defendants in this lawsuit. Plaintiff may, if

he so chooses, file a Motion to Dismiss Defendant Rae Timme and Tom Clements in their

individual capacities.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all future filings in this matter shall have case

captions that conform with this amendment.

Dated: July 12, 2013

Case 1:11-cv-02530-RM-KLM Document 42 Filed 07/12/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           1,917
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,849
<ALLOWANCES>                                       984
<INVENTORY>                                     16,806
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,555
<PP&E>                                         133,666
<DEPRECIATION>                                  57,126
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 184,463
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,680
<BONDS>                                         69,907
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           165
<OTHER-SE>                                      76,264
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   184,463
<SALES>                                        172,290
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               172,290
<CGS>                                          122,390
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  122,390
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                36,263
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,279
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,090
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,154
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,936
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,936
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1433 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1433

To amend the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act to provide 
competitive status to certain Federal employees in the State of Alaska.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 21, 2007

 Ms. Murkowski introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act to provide 
competitive status to certain Federal employees in the State of Alaska.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Thomas P. O'Hara Public Land Career 
Opportunity Act of 2007''.

SEC. 2. COMPETITIVE STATUS FOR CERTAIN FEDERAL EMPLOYEES IN THE STATE 
              OF ALASKA.

    Section 1308 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act 
(16 U.S.C. 3198) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections 
        (d) and (e), respectively; and
            (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
    ``(c) Competitive Status.--An individual appointed to a permanent 
position under subsection (a) shall be converted to competitive status 
after--
            ``(1) if the appointment is full time, the completion of 2 
        years of competitive and satisfactory full time service; or
            ``(2) if the appointment is less than full time, the period 
        that is equivalent to 2 years of competitive and satisfactory 
        full time service.''.
                                 <all>
```
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 16

- 00029

- CR

Gerald Wayne Roberts

v. The State of Texas

On Appeal from the 21st District Court of Burleson County , Texas

Trial Cause No. 13,646

JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on
appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court
orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 9, 2016
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted
Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of iGATE Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sujit Sircar, Chief Financial 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, to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/S/ SUJIT SIRCAR                    
|Sujit Sircar Chief Financial Officer

Date: May 6, 2011
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Luis Carlos Castano, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered on January 29, 1988, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of from 8 *Vi*years to life, is unanimously affirmed.

Defendant herein was sentenced in accordance with the *852terms of the plea agreement. In response to his request for a favorable recommendation to the Parole Board, the court advised him that, while he was incarcerated, he write an annual letter at Christmas time to a newspaper in his hometown of Medellin, Colombia, detailing his life in prison and generally describing his remorse. In that regard, the Judge stated that his communication to the Parole Board would be affected by defendant’s compliance with the court’s suggestion. However, notwithstanding defendant’s contention on appeal that the court violated his constitutional rights by imposing a letter-writing "requirement”, the fact remains that his sentence is in no way contingent upon his writing any letters. Defendant was certainly not obligated to follow the court’s proposal nor was he entitled to obtain a recommendation, good or otherwise, from the Judge for the consideration of the Parole Board. Indeed, the court’s decision to communicate with the Parole Board is entirely discretionary, as is the Parole Board’s action in releasing prisoners *(see, Matter of Briguglio v New York State Bd. of Parole,*24 NY2d 21, 29). Accordingly, the court was authorized in conditioning its favorable recommendation upon defendant writing letters home. Moreover, we are unpersuaded that defendant’s sentence was unduly harsh or severe *(see, People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302). Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.
Case 1:11-cr-00312-WJM Document 36 Filed 10/23/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Case 1:11-cr-00312-WJM Document 36 Filed 10/23/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Action No. 11-po-00105-DW-01

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COREY RICHARDS,

Defendant.

ORDER TERMINATING PROBATION UNSATISFACTORILY

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon report of the probation officer regarding

the defendant’s unsatisfactory adjustment to probation. On September 14, 2012, a

violation hearing was held and the Court found that the defendant’s adjustment to

probation has been unsatisfactory. It is hereby

ORDERED that the defendant’s probation be terminated unsatisfactorily,

effective September 14, 2012.

DATED at Durango, Colorado, this 11th day of October, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

s/David L. West 

United States Magistrate Judge
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3

                        ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         The Employment Agreement between The viaLink Company ("viaLink") and
David Lloyd dated the 9th day of April, 1999 is amended as follows:

1.   Effective as of the 10th day of March, 2000, the title of David Lloyd shall
     be "Senior Vice President of Operations".

2.   Effective as of the 10th day of March, 2000, the annualized salary set
     forth in Section 4.1 of said Employment Agreement shall be increased to
     Two hundred and twelve thousand dollars ($212,000).

3.   The first sentence of Section 6.1 shall be deleted and replaced with the
     following sentence: "Except as hereinafter set forth, the term ("Term) of
     this Agreement shall commence on the 9th day of April, 1999 ("Effective
     Date and shall continue through the 25th day of May, 2001 and shall be
     automatically renewed on a year to year basis thereafter unless one party
     hereto notifies the other party hereto in writing at least thirty (30)
     days prior to the end of the then current Term that it will not renew this
     Agreement at the end of such then current Term."

4.   Except as amended herein, no further changes are made to the Employment
     Agreement and the same remains in full force and effect.


The viaLink Company                                  David Lloyd



By: /s/ LEWIS B. KILBOURNE                           /s/ DAVID LLOYD
   -------------------------                         -------------------------
   Lewis B. Kilbourne                                David Lloyd

Its:   Chief Executive Officer


Date:  3/10/2000                                     Date:  3/23/2000
     -------------------------                            --------------------
Exhibit 23.2

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference into the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (see File No. 333-17883, effective December 31, 1996) of
our report dated February 16, 2001 with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Inrad, Inc. and Subsidiary included in the Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000.


/s/ HOLTZ RUBENSTEIN & CO., LLP
HOLTZ RUBENSTEIN & CO., LLP
Melville, New York
March 19, 2001
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 21

                        Subsidiaries of the Registrant

AeroGo, Inc.
Incorporated in the state of Washington

Allegany, Inc.
Incorporated in the state of Delaware

Evergreen Weigh, Inc.
Incorporated in the state of Washington

NV Technology, Inc.
Incorporated in the state of Nevada

Revere Transducers, Inc.
Incorporated in the state of Delaware

Revere Transducers Europe BV
Incorporated in the Netherlands

IDEAutomation International, Inc.
Incorporated in the Virgin Islands

AeroGo Export I
Incorporated in Guam

AeroGo Export II
Incorporated in Guam

                                       43
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          25,769
<SECURITIES>                                    80,213
<RECEIVABLES>                                  114,774
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,932)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               243,434
<PP&E>                                          35,536
<DEPRECIATION>                                (13,171)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 361,624
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,257
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           513
<OTHER-SE>                                     212,450
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   367,321
<SALES>                                        178,874
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               178,874
<CGS>                                          114,589
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  185,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,911
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,212
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,241
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,897
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,344
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (1,205)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 26,853
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,139
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12


</TABLE>
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State v. Amos, Slip Opinion No. 2019-Ohio-168.]

NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of De cisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published.

S LIP O PINION N O . 2019-O HIO -168
T HE S TATE OF O HIO , A PPELLANT , v . A MOS , A PPELLEE . [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State v. Amos, Slip Opinion No. 2019-Ohio-168.] Appeal dismissed as having been improvidently accepted

. (No. 2017-1778

― Submitted January 9, 2019

― Decided January 23, 2019.)
A PPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, Nos. C-160717 and C-160718, 2017-Ohio-8448.

_________________ {¶ 1} This case is dismissed as having been improvidently accepted.
F RENCH , O SOWIK , D E W INE , D ONNELLY , and S TEWART , JJ., concur. O’C ONNOR , C.J., and K ENNEDY , J., dissent.
T HOMAS J. O SOWIK , J., of the Sixth District Court of Appeals, sitting for
F ISCHER , J.

_________________ Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Pr osecuting Attorney, and Paula E. Adams, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant.S UPREME C OURT OF O HIO

2 Raymond T. Faller, Hamilton County P ublic Defender, and Julie Kahrs Nessler and Joshua A. Thompson, Assist ant Public Defenders, for appellee. Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defende r, and Charlyn Bohland, Assistant Public Defender; Juvenile Law Center a nd Marsha L. Levick; Justice for Children Project and Kimberly P. Jordan; and Children’s Law Center, Inc., and Rickell Howard, urging affirmance for amici curiae Ohio Public Defender, Juvenile Law Center, National Juven ile Defender Center, Associati on for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Professor Catherine Carpenter, Justice for Children Project, and Children’s Law Center, Inc.

_________________
Exhibit 10.6

                               AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
                                RIGHTS AGREEMENT

         This Amendment, dated as of October 9, 1997, to the Rights Agreement,
dated as of December 11, 1996 between Newport News Shipbuilding Inc. (the
"Company") and First Chicago Trust Company of New York, as Rights Agent (the
"Rights Agent"), as previously amended by an Amendment No. 1 dated as of March
25, 1997 (the "Rights Agreement"), provides:

         WHEREAS, the Company now believes it is desirable to amend the Rights
Agreement in certain respects to clarify the treatment of certain options to
acquire common stock of the Company granted or to be granted pursuant to certain
employee benefit plans maintained by the Company; and

         WHEREAS, such amendment is permitted by and in compliance with Section
26, clauses (ii) and (iv) of the Rights Agreement;

         NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Rights Agent
hereby agree as follows:

         1. Capitalized  terms used,  but not  defined,  herein  shall have the
meanings set forth in the Rights Agreement.

         2. The first sentence of Section 3(c) of the Rights Agreement is
amended to read as follows:

         Rights shall be issued in respect of all shares of Common Stock that
         are issued (whether originally issued or from the Company's treasury)
         after the Record Date but prior to (i) in the case of shares of Common
         Stock issued pursuant to options or other stock-based awards granted
         prior to the Distribution Date under any of the Company's employee or
         director compensation plans now or hereafter in effect, the Expiration
         Date, and (ii) in the case of all other issuances of Common Stock, the
         earlier of the Distribution Date or the Expiration Date.

         3. Except as amended hereby, the Rights Agreement shall remain in
effect.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be duly
executed and their respective corporate seals to be hereunto affixed and
attested, all as of the date and year first above written.


<PAGE>


ATTEST:                             NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING INC.

By  Peter A. V. Huegel              By  Stephen B. Clarkson
    ------------------                  -------------------
    Name:  Peter A. V. Huegel           Name:  Stephen B. Clarkson
    Title: Assistant Secretary          Title: Vice President, General Counsel
                                                    and Secretary

ATTEST:                             FIRST CHICAGO TRUST COMPANY
                                    OF NEW YORK

By  Craig Broomfield                By  Charles D. Keryc
    --------------------------          --------------------------
    Name:  Craig Broomfield             Name:  Charles D. Keryc
    Title: Assistant Vice President     Title: Vice President
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01953-BNB

ANTHONY HERNANDEZ,

Applicant,

v.

STEVE HARTLY, and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO,

Respondents.

ORDER

Following review of Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss, the Court has found a

discrepancy in Respondents citations to both Exhibit A and Exhibit B. In more than one 

instance, Respondents refer to pages five and eight in Exhibit B. There are only three

pages included in Exhibit B. Also, Respondents assert that Exhibit B includes

information regarding 1996 decisions by the Colorado Court of Appeals and the

Colorado Supreme Court. The information included in Exhibit B only appears to 

address filings before these courts in 2005. 

Respondents are directed to review all citations, make the necessary corrections,

and provide additional documentation as needed. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that within twenty-one days from the date of this Order

Respondents shall supplement the Motion to Dismiss as directed above. It is

Case 1:11-cv-01953-LTB Document 19 Filed 01/25/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant shall have twenty-one days from the date

Respondents file a Supplement to file a Supplemental Reply.

DATED January 25, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Boyd N. Boland 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-01953-LTB Document 19 Filed 01/25/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2