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

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice (08-069)] 

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Availability of Inventions for Licensing.

# SUMMARY:

Patent applications on the inventions listed below assigned to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, have been filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and are available for licensing. 

# DATES:

October 9, 2008. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert M. Padilla, Patent Counsel, Ames Research Center, Code 202A-4, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000; telephone (650) 604-5104; fax (650) 604-2767. 

*NASA Case No. ARC-15977-1:*                         Artificial Immune System Approach For Airborne Vehicle Maneuvering;                     

*NASA Case No. ARC 16135-1:*                         Efficiency Solar Cell Using Nano-Sculpted Substrate.                    

Dated: October 3, 2008. 

Michael C. Wholley, 

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. E8-24057 Filed 10-8-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02680-RBJ-KLM

JOHN DOE,

Plaintiff,

v.

MERCK & CO., INC., and

MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________

MINUTE ORDER

_____________________________________________________________________

ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Set Date to

Designate Non-parties at Fault Pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111.5 at 90 Days

After Due Date for Parties’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) Disclosures [Docket No. 13; Filed

January 12, 2012] (the “Motion”). 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Defendants must

designate non-parties at fault, if any, pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111.5 (2011) no

later than ninety (90) days after the due date of the parties’ mandatory initial disclosures

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1). The parties should include these dates in their

proposed Scheduling Order.

Dated: February 9, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02680-RBJ-KLM Document 20 Filed 02/09/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 7, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.101 Nonfinancial Business1** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>

                                                        EXHIBIT 11




                NORTH PITTSBURGH SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                 Statement of Computation of Earnings per Share


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                   For the Three Months         For the Six Months
                                      Ended June 30                Ended June 30
                                ------------------------    ------------------------
                                    2000         1999           2000         1999
                                -----------  -----------    -----------  -----------
<S>                             <C>          <C>            <C>          <C>
Net Earnings                    $ 3,276,000  $ 2,779,000    $ 5,712,000  $ 6,195,000
                                ===========  ===========    ===========  ===========

Weighted average common
   shares outstanding            15,005,000   15,005,000     15,005,000   15,005,000
                                ===========  ===========    ===========  ===========

Basic and diluted earnings
   per share of common stock    $       .22  $       .18    $       .38  $       .41
                                ===========  ===========    ===========  ===========

</TABLE>
| Skip to Content*Release Date: September 17, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.129 Security Brokers and Dealers** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### VINCENNES STEEL CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Marvin A. HOLDER.

No. 11018.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Nov. 15, 1937.

Fred A. Isgrig and Harry C. Robinson, both of Little Rock, Ark., and Seymour Riddle, of Vincennes, Ind., for appellant.

J. Loyd Shouse, W. S. Walker, Virgil D. Willis, and Eugene W. Moore, all of Harrison, Ark., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed at appellant’s costs, on motion of appellant and consent of appellee.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 171 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2007 

Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 301 Commerce Street in Commerce, Oklahoma, as the ‘‘Mickey Mantle Post Office Building’’. 

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


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

S 171 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. MICKEY MANTLE POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 301 Commerce Street in Com4 merce, Oklahoma, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Mickey Mantle Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Mickey Mantle Post 

10 Office Building’’. 

Passed the Senate February 17, 2007. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 20 filed 09/07/11 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 3
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 20 filed 09/07/11 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 3
Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 20 filed 09/07/11 USDC Colorado pg 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-51053

Summary Calendar

JOEL GARCIA-GONZALEZ,

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; BUREAU OF PRISONS; WARDEN, RCDC

III; GEO GROUP; DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,

Respondents-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CV-79

Before KING, CLEMENT, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Joel Garcia-Gonzalez, federal prisoner # 89326-079, an alien against whom

the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has issued a detainer

subjecting him to immediate removal from the United States upon release from

Bureau of Prisons (BOP) custody, moves this court to proceed in forma pauperis

(IFP) to appeal the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging the BOP’s

exclusion of him from rehabilitation programs and halfway houses. His

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 26, 2013

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: 12-51053 Document: 00512156396 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/26/2013
No. 12-51053

arguments are foreclosed by this court’s decision in Gallegos-Hernandez v.

United States, 688 F.3d 190, 192-93 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 561 (2012).

Accordingly, Garcia-Gonzalez’s motion to proceed IFP is DENIED, and his

appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 12-51053 Document: 00512156396 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/26/2013
Exhibit 32.2

Certification by Chief Financial Officer of Amendment No. 1 on Form 10K/A

I, Steven E. Spooner, Chief Financial Officer of Mitel Networks Corporation (Mitel), 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 Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A of Mitel, for the year ended
December 31, 2015 filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

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

Dated: April 27, 2016



/s/ Steven E. SpoonerName: Steven E. Spooner Title: Chief Financial
Officer
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.2
 CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE CORPORATION
 NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS
 THIS AGREEMENT
 R E C I T A L S :
   NOW THEREFORE
 Grant of the Option
 Option Term




---



##### 



Exercise of Option
       Adjustments Upon Changes in Capitalization or Reorganization
  2




---



##### 



Non-Transferability of the Option
 Compliance with Securities and other Laws
 3




---



##### 



Issuance of Shares
 Alternative Award for Cancellation of the Option
 Notices
 Choice of Law
 Option Subject to Plan
 Amendment of Agreement
 Administration of Plan and Agreement
 Execution in Counterparts
 [Signature Page Follows]
 4




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE CORPORATIONBy:Andrew F. JacobsPresident and Chief Executive Officer [OPTIONEE][_____________________] 5




---



##### 



CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE CORPORATION
 RESTRICTED STOCK AGREEMENT
FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS
    GRANT
 Grant and Acceptance
 Effect of Plan
 RIGHTS IN SHARES
 VESTING
 Vesting




---



##### 



Percentage of Shares
    
    CumulativeDate
    
    Vested on Specified Date
    
    Percentage of Shares[_________]
    
    [___]
    
    [___][_________]
    
    [___]
    
    [___][_________]
    
    [___]
    
    [___][_________]
    
    [___]
    
    [___]
  Effect of Grantees Death
 Effect of Dissolution or Liquidation
 Effect of Change of Control
 Effect of Forfeiture
 STOCK CERTIFICATES
 TRANSFER AND REPURCHASES UPON TERMINATION
  2




---



##### 



WITHHOLDINGS
 ADJUSTMENTS TO AWARD SHARES
 Stock Dividends and Splits and Similar Transactions
 Change in Par Value
 Other Capital Adjustments
 3




---



##### 



GRANTEES REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
     IMPACT ON OTHER BENEFITS
 ADMINISTRATION
 AMENDMENT(S)
 FORCE AND EFFECT
 GOVERNING LAWS
 MISCELLANEOUS
  4




---



##### 



[Signature Page Follows]
 5




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE CORPORATIONBy:Andrew F. JacobsPresident and Chief Executive Officer [GRANTEE][_____________________] 6
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

1751 Pinnacle Drive

McLean VA 22102-3811

Telephone (703) 918 3000

Facsimile (703) 918 3100

 

 

 

Report of Independent Accountants

To the Board of Directors and Stockholder 

of SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. and Subsidiaries:

 

We have examined management's assertion about SunTrust  Mortgage, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the "Company") compliance with the minimum servicing standards identified in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers ("USAP") as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002 included in the accompanying management assertion (see Exhibit I). Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with those minimum servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance based on our examination.
Our examination was made in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the minimum servicing standards and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002 is fairly stated, in**all material respects.***PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP

February 24, 2003*PricewaterhouseCoopers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 ****
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge William J. Martínez

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02636-WJM-CBS

STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

JAY H. WILLIAMS, an individual, and 

NEWTOWN TEN, INC., a Colorado corporation

Defendants.

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION AND APPROVING SETTLEMENT

AGREEMENT

This matter comes before the Court on the Parties’ Stipulation for Order

Approving Settlement Agreement, Entering Judgment in Accordance therewith, and

Stay of Execution (“Stipulation”) (ECF No. 67). The Court having reviewed the

Stipulation, the Settlement Agreement, and all related exhibits, pleadings and

documents, and being fully advised in the premises, hereby ORDERS as follows:

The Parties’ Stipulation for Order Approving Settlement Agreement is GRANTED

(ECF No. 68). The Court has reviewed the Settlement Agreement between the parties,

which was attached as Exhibit A to the Stipulation (ECF No. 67), and hereby

APPROVES the Settlement Agreement and ENTERS same as an Order of the Court.

Case 1:11-cv-02636-WJM-CBS Document 75 Filed 11/14/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

Dated this 14th day of November, 2013, nunc pro tunc 16th day of April, 2013

BY THE COURT:

__________________________

William J. Martínez 

United States District Judge 

Case 1:11-cv-02636-WJM-CBS Document 75 Filed 11/14/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 12
 CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE CORPORATION
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF INCOME FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS (BEFORE FIXED CHARGES) TO COMBINED
FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
(In thousands, except ratios)
(Unaudited)
  Three MonthsEnded
    
    
    Year Ended December 31,March 31, 2009
    
    
    2008
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004Fixed charges
    
    $
    42,144
    
    
    $
    258,453
    
    
    $
    275,648
    
    
    $
    235,521
    
    
    $
    106,909
    
    
    $
    44,939Preferred stock dividends
    
    
    5,061
    
    
    
    20,251
    
    
    
    20,256
    
    
    
    20,256
    
    
    
    20,256
    
    
    
    20,259Combined fixed charges and
preferred stock dividends
    
    $
    47,205
    
    
    $
    278,704
    
    
    $
    295,904
    
    
    $
    255,777
    
    
    $
    127,165
    
    
    $
    65,198Fixed charges
    
    $
    42,144
    
    
    $
    258,453
    
    
    $
    275,648
    
    
    $
    235,521
    
    
    $
    106,909
    
    
    $
    44,939Income from continuing
operations
    
    
    42,076
    
    
    
    125,923
    
    
    
    24,713
    
    
    
    3,843
    
    
    
    17,195
    
    
    
    39,869$
    84,220
    
    
    $
    384,376
    
    
    $
    300,361
    
    
    $
    239,364
    
    
    $
    124,104
    
    
    $
    84,808Ratio of income from continuing
operations (before fixed
charges) to combined fixed
charges and preferred
stock dividends
    
    
    1.78:1
    
    
    
    1.38:1
    
    
    
    1.02:1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1.30:1Deficiency of income from
continuing operations (before
fixed charges) to combined fixed
charges and preferred stock
dividends
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    16,413
    
    
    $
    3,061
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

Inconnection with the annual report on Form 10-K of United Wisconsin GrainProducers, LLC (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2007, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, J. F. Robertson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ J. F. Robertson         |
|--------|-----------------------------|
|   | J.  F. Robertson            |
|   | *Chief  Executive Officer*  |
|   | * *                    |
|   | Dated:  March 17, 2008 |

 

----
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A0 42 7

. TMX F I NANCE HOLDI N GS, INC. et a l

. v

. DRUMMOND

FI NANCI AL SERVI CES, LLC et a l

.

In t h i s act i o n b et ween co m p et i n g co ng l o m erat es of au to t i t l e lo an co m p an i es , t h e pl ai nt i ff ap p el l ees al leg ed t h e d efen d an t ap p el l an ts e n g ag ed i n a nat i o n wi d e

cam p ai g n o f u n fai r co m

p et i t i on t o st eal t he ap p el l ees ’ cu s t om ers

. O n M ay 2 8

, 2 0 1 5,

t h e t ri al co urt g ran t ed an i n t erl o cu to ry i n ju n ct i on i n fav o r o f t h e p l ai n t i ff ap p el l ees ,

en jo i n i n g t h e d efen d an t ap p el l an t s fro m s earch i n g an y s t at e’ s d at ab as es i d en t i fy i n g

an y cu s t o m ers o f t h e ap p el l ees ; fro m en teri n g t h e p ark i ng l ot s o f an y o f t h e p l ai n t i ff

ap p el l ees ’ s t ores ; an d fro m s o l i ci t i ng an y

o f t h e p l ai nt i ff ap p el l ees ’ cu s t o m ers

. In g ran t i n g t h e i n t erl o cu t o ry i n ju nct i on , t he t r i a l c o u r t fo u n d (1 ) th ere was a

s u b s t an t i al t h reat t he a p p el l ees wo u l d s u ffer irrep arab l e i n ju ry i n t he fo rm o f l o s t

cu s t o m ers , l o s t g o o d wi ll ; an d rep eat ed tres p a s s e s ; (2 ) th e t h reat en ed i n ju ry t o t h e

ap p el l ees far o u t w e i g h s an y h arm t o t h e ap p el l an ts ; (3 ) an i n t erl o cu t o ry i nju n ct i o n

wo u l d s erv e t h e p ub l i c in t eres t ; an d (4 ) t h e r e w a s a su b s t an t i al l i k el i h o o d t h e

ap p el l ees wo u ld p rev ai l o n t h e m eri ts o f t h ei r cl ai m s

. As t h i s ap p eal t h u s in v o l v es t h e pro p ri et y o f eq u i t ab l e rel i ef, ju ri s di ct i o n o v er

t h e ap p eal l i es wi t h t h e Su p rem e Co u rt

. Ga. Co ns t

. o f 19 8 3

, Art

. V I, Sec. VI, Par. III (2 ); El ect r o n i c D at a S

ys t ems Co r

p. v. Hei n ema n n , 2 68 G a. 7 55 (4 9 3 SE2 d 1 3 2 ) (1 9 9 7). Acco rd i n g l y , th i s ap p eal i s h ereb y TRANSFERRED t o t h e Su p rem e Co u rt

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 02/16/2016 February 16, 2016
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1842

SHARON L. SAUNDERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ILA LOCAL 1970, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-02-795-2) Submitted: January 30, 2004 Decided: February 13, 2004 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Raymond Simonsen, Jr., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Charles S. Montagna, MONTAGNA, BREIT, KLEIN & CAMDEN, L.L.P., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Sharon L. Saunders appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to Defendant in this Title VII action and denying Saunders’ motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Saunders v. ILA Local 1970 , No. CA-02-795-2 (E.D. Va. filed June 5, 2003; entered June 6, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 9 A0 47 7 . J EREMI AH CARBON v . P FI N 1 1, LLC.

Th i s cas e b eg an as a d is p o s s es s o ry p ro ceed i n g i n m ag i s trat e co u rt . Aft er t h e

m ag i s t rat e co u rt i s s u ed a j u d gm en t i n fa v o r o f t h e p l ai nt i ff, d efen dan t J erem i ah Carb o n ap p eal ed t o s u peri o r co u rt

. Th e s u p eri o r co u rt al s o r u led in fav o r o f t h e p l ai n t i ff, an d Carb on ap p eal s

. W e, h o wev er, l ack ju ri s di ct i o n

.

“ [A] p p eal s fro m d eci s i o n s o f t h e s u peri o r co u rt s rev i ewi n g d eci s io n s o f l o wer

co u rt s b y cert i orari o r de no v o p ro ceed i n g s sh al l b e by ap p l i cat i on fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal .” Bu l l o ck v. S

a n d , 2 60 Ga. Ap p

. 8 7 4 , 8 75 (5 8 1 SE2 d 3 33 ) (2 0 03 ); s ee al s o OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (a) (1 ). Becau s e Carb o n d i d no t fo l l o w t h e p ro p er p r oced u re fo r

o b t ai n i n g ap p el l at e rev i ew, we l ack ju ri s di ct i o n

. Acco rd i n gl y , t h is ap p eal i s h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. October 30, 2018

10/30/2018