alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 4.73



This is an English Translation





Spousal Consent
Letter



I, Chunxia He (ID No:    ), as the legal
spouse of Jianming Dong (ID No: ), hereby unconditionally agree that the equity interests of Beijing Qihu Technology Company Limited,
owned by and registered under name of my spouse, is disposed in accordance with the arrangements under Loan Agreement, Equity,
Equity Disposition Agreement and Equity Pledge Agreement dated as of October 18, 2010 and other supplementary agreements to be
signed from time to time.



I further guarantee not to take any
action at any time with an intention conflicting against the above-identified arrangements, including making a claim to court or
other competent authorities that such equity interests constitute the property or community property between my spouse and me.
I, unconditionally and irrevocably, hereby waive any and all rights or benefits granted to me with relation to such equity interests
under applicable laws and confirm that in no event such equity interests constitute any community property between my spouse and
me.



| |                     |                 
| | ------------------- | ----------------
| | Name of the Spouse: | /s/ Chunxia He  
| |                     | Chunxia He      
| |                     |                 
| | ID No:              |                 
| | Date                | October 18, 2010



Witness:





/s/ Mingzhe Zhou

_______________________

Mingzhe Zhou





/s/ Qiuhua Xu

_______________________

Qiuhua Xu
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________
No. 22

- 14168
Non

- Argument Calendar

____________________
JEROME (NMN) ALLEN,
Petitioner

- Appellant,

versus SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondents

- Appellees.

____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 6:21

- cv

- 01623

- CEM

- DCI USCA11 Case: 22-14168 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 04/30/2024 Page: 1 of 32 Opinion of the Court 22

- 14168

_______________ _____ Before W ILSON , R OSENBAUM , and G RANT , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: Jerome Allen, a Florida state prisoner proceeding with counsel, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for lack of jurisdiction as untimely and successive . Instead of addressing the district court’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction , Allen ’s retained counsel argues only the merits and underlying constitutional claims in his case , failing to address the jurisdictional issue. 1 Issues not raised on appeal are deemed forfeited. United States v. Campbell , 26 F.4th 860, 8 72

– 73 (11th Cir. 2022 ) ( en banc )

. An appellant fails to adequately brief a claim when he does not “plainly and prominently r aise it.” Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co. , 739 F.3d 678, 680

– 81 (11th Cir. 2014) (quotation marks omitted). Here, Allen has forfeited any claim that the district court erred in dismissing his Section 2254 petition as successive, as he does not raise any arguments on appeal challenging this determination. See id. A barred attorney retained by a prisoner seeking reli ef from a state court judgment is expected to understand and adhere to

1 Although not required to file a reply brief , Allen’s counsel did not do so despite that being an opportunity to address the specific jurisdiction al arguments that Florida brought up in its response brief. USCA11 Case: 22-14168 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 04/30/2024 Page: 2 of 322

- 14168 Opinion of the Court 3

state 2 and federal habeas requirements. This court is troubled by the failure of Allen’s counsel to do so. As explained by the district court, Allen’s 2019 resentencing was imposed n unc pro tunc , so his amended sentence was not a “new judgment” for the purposes of Section 2244. See Osbourne v. Se c ’y , Fla. Dep’t of C o rr. , 968 F.3d 1261, 1266 (1 1th Cir. 2020)

. Accordingly, his 2021 Section 2254 petition was successive to his 1998 and 2001 Section 2254 petitions concerning the same judgment

. And a s Allen’s counsel should know, a petitioner must receive authorization from this court prior to filing a successive habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). Allen’s counsel filed this successive habeas petition without authorization, thus requiring the district court to dismiss it.
AFFIRM ED

.

2 Allen may have filed a successive motion for postconviction relief in Florida state court pursuant to Fl orid a Rule of Crim inal P rocedure 3.850 (h). USCA11 Case: 22-14168 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 04/30/2024 Page: 3 of 3
News United States Air Force
 Some medically separated Airmen can have their disability ratings reviewedPublished June 23, 2017
                        
                        By Richard Salomon
                        
                        
                        Air Force Personnel Center Public Affairs
                **JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas (AFNS)  --**
                Airmen who were medically separated between Sept. 11, 2001 and Dec. 31, 2009, can have their disability ratings reviewed. Airmen medically separated with a combined disability rating of 20 percent or less and who received separation pay versus medical retirement may request a Physical Disability Board of Review. 
The PDBR evaluates disability cases for all the military branches and their reserve components. In 2008, the Defense Department designated the Air Force as the lead component to manage the PDBR. 
When reviewing records, board members first compare DOD and Veterans Affairs ratings and then make a recommendation to the respective service secretary. If applicable, military records are then updated with a retroactive effective date equal to the original date of separation.
“The intent is to ensure fairness and accuracy as well as consistency across the services,” said Troy McIntosh, the Headquarters Air Force PDBR president. 
Applicants may not appear before the board in person; however, they can include any statements, briefs, medical records or other supporting documents with their application. After the document review is completed and a final decision is rendered, applicants will be notified of the decision and provided applicable information regarding changes to their disability rating.  
For more information, visit www.health.mil/PDBR.physical disability 



post 9/11 



medical separation 



review board 



PDBR 



AFPC 



personnel 



medical 



DOD 



veterans affairs
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 11, 2009*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.231 Unidentified Miscellaneous Financial Claims** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
EXHIBIT 21.1

|                                           |        |                |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|----------------|
| Name                                      |   | Jurisdiction   |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings I LLC    |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings II LLC   |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings VII LLC  |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings VIII LLC |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings XI LLC   |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings XII LLC  |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital PL Holdings LLC          |   | Delaware       |
| GIG Rooster Holdings I LLC                |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Funding 2018-2 Ltd.              |   | Cayman Islands |
| Garrison Funding 2018-2 LLC               |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital SBIC Holdco Inc.         |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital SBIC LP                  |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital SBIC General Partner LLC |   | Delaware       |
|                                      |   |           |
EXHIBIT
      32.1 - CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF BLUEGATE CORPORATION PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 AND SECTION 1350 OF 18 U.S.C.
      63.





I,
      Manfred Sternberg, the Chief Executive Officer of Bluegate Corporation, hereby
      certify that Bluegate Corporation 's periodic report on Form 10-QSB, for the
      period ending September 30, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that
      information contained in the periodic report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents,
      in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of the operations
      of
      Bluegate Corporation.








Date:
              November 3, 2006
            /s/
              Manfred SternbergManfred
                SternbergChief
                Executive Officer
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-19-00139-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 141st District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 141-308583-19

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Gabriel and Kerr, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

J. MICHAEL FERGUSON, PC, ANSON FINANCIAL, INC., AFI LOAN 

SERVICING, LLC, AND MBH REAL ESTATE, LLC, Appellants

V.

SILVER STAR TITLE D/B/A SENDERA TITLE, ELIZABETH ESPINO, KATHY 

E. MONTES, LUCY OLIVAS, AND LAW OFFICE OF SALVADOR ESPINO,

PLLC, Appellees
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

On August 16, 2019, and August 27, 2019, we notified appellants, in

accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal 

unless appellant paid the $205 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 44.3. Appellants

have not done so. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

Because appellants have not complied with a procedural requirement of this 

court and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of August 28, 2015,1 we dismiss the 

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

Appellants must pay all costs of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: September 19, 2019

 

1See Supreme Court of Tex., Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases 

in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, 

Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 (Aug. 28, 2015) (listing courts of appeals’ fees).
| (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. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: July 23, 2010     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |   |
|                    |   |
| /s/ Stephen J. Sperco   |   |
| Stephen J. Sperco       |   |
| Chief Executive Officer |   |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SEROLOGICALS CORPORATION FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 26, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-27-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-26-2000
<CASH>                                           2,152
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,762
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     34,403
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,118
<PP&E>                                          47,491
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,101
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 150,551
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,033
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           259
<OTHER-SE>                                     109,660
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   150,551
<SALES>                                         36,335
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,335
<CGS>                                           26,333
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,333
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,871
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 422
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,709
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,336
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,373
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,373
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 256 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 256

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To amend Public Law 93-435 with respect to the Northern Mariana 
 Islands, providing parity with Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American 
                                 Samoa.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT.

    (a) In General.--The first section and section 2 of Public Law 93-
435 (48 U.S.C. 1705, 1706) are amended by inserting ``the Commonwealth 
of the Northern Mariana Islands,'' after ``Guam,'' each place it 
appears.
    (b) References to Date of Enactment.--For the purposes of the 
amendment made by subsection (a), each reference in Public Law 93-435 
to the ``date of enactment'' shall be considered to be a reference to 
the date of the enactment of this section.

SEC. 2. ADJUSTMENT OF SCHEDULED WAGE INCREASES IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF 
              THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS.

    Section 8103(b)(1)(B) of the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 (29 
U.S.C. 206 note; Public Law 110-28) is amended by striking ``2011'' and 
inserting ``2011, 2013, and 2015''.

            Passed the Senate August 1, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
113th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 256

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To amend Public Law 93-435 with respect to the Northern Mariana 
 Islands, providing parity with Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American 
                                 Samoa.
```
News United States Air Force
 SecAF addresses air and space innovationPublished Oct. 5, 2017
                        
                        By Staff Sgt. Rusty Frank
                        
                        
                        Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs Office
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS)  --**
                Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson spoke about the importance of modernization and innovation in space during a Center for Strategic and International Studies forum in Washington, D.C., Oct. 5, 2017.
“Our mission is to organize, train and equip air and space forces,” said Wilson. “We are the ones, since 1954, who are responsible for everything from 100 feet below the earth in missile silos all the way up to the stars...that’s our responsibility and we own it.” 
The Air Force faces significant challenges in space because America’s adversaries know how important space is to the U.S., Wilson said.
She added the Air Force is responsible for providing the world’s first utility, which is the GPS system. This global system which the U.S. military uses is the same system that industry relies on. Whether it’s the local ATM or the stock exchange, the GPS is at the center, Wilson said.
“A huge part of our economy is dependent on what’s done in space,” she said.
The Air Force must deter a conflict in space, and has an obligation to be prepared to fight and win if deterrence fails. 
To that end, the 2018 presidential budget proposed a 20 percent increase for space, which Wilson said is the next frontier of global innovation. The Air Force remains committed to gaining and maintaining space superiority across the spectrum of conflict in defense of the nation, she added. 
“We need to normalize space from a national security perspective,” said Wilson. “We have to have all of our officers who are wearing blue uniforms more knowledgeable about space capabilities and how it connects to the other domains.”
Wilson added in the future, space will no longer be a benign environment, soon it will be a common domain for human endeavor. Accessibility to space is growing rapidly as launch technology evolves, the cost of launches will drop from thousands of dollars per pound of fuel to hundreds, the technology will get faster and smaller, and more nation-states and individuals will have greater access to space.
“Our most recent launch out of Cape Canaveral was a Space X rocket that launched, and then recovered using GPS guidance technology back on the pad from which that stage launched,” said Wilson. “That wasn’t possible 10 years ago, but it’s being done by American innovation. It’s an exciting time to be part of this enterprise.”SecAF 



Heather Wilson 



innovation 



modernization 



space 



Center for Strategic and International Studies 



air and space forces 



Global Positioning Satellite system 



global innovation 



national security
News United States Air Force
 Alaskan Raptors arrive in Australia for training initiativePublished Feb. 17, 2017
                        
                        By Staff Sgt. Alexander Martinez
                        
                        
                        Headquarters Pacific Air Forces Public Affairs
                **ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE BASE TINDAL, Australia (AFNS)  --**
                The last wave of F-22 Raptors from the 90th Fighter Squadron at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, arrived here Feb. 14 to launch bilateral exercise and training missions with the Royal Australian Air Force and further strengthen the military relationship the two nations share. “We are thrilled to be here and working with our Australian counterparts,” said Lt. Col. Dave Skalicky, the 90th FS commander. “They have been phenomenal hosts, and their level of support allows us to increase our combined capabilities.”The F-22s, 12 in total, came to RAAF Base Tindal under the direction of U.S. Navy Adm. Harry B. Harris, the U.S. Pacific Command commander, as part of the Enhanced Air Cooperation Initiative under the Force Posture Agreement between the U.S. and Australia. This combined training activity marks the most extensive F-22 joint training with Australia in duration and scale, providing the Raptors the opportunity to conduct integrated air operations training with the RAAF’s 75 Squadron F/A-18A/B Hornets. “We constantly look forward to training operating with our U.S. counterparts, in particular, with fifth-generation squadrons such as the 90th FS,” said Wing Commander Mick Grant, the 75 Squadron commander. “Usually we only integrate with the F-22s at major exercises in the U.S. such as Red Flag or during coalition operations, so we appreciate the efforts of the 90th FS having traveled a significant distance to Australia to join us in our backyard this year. Northern Australia’s extreme climate and distinctive training areas provide our ally unique opportunities to train with their fifth-generation aircraft in a range of environmental conditions.”The F-22s and F/A-18A/Bs will conduct offensive and defensive training missions at various locations in the Northern Territory and Queensland. Skalicky explained the history of the 90th FS and how it can trace it’s lineage back to World War II when the then U.S. Army Air Forces 90th Bombardment Squadron conducted missions out of the area against the Japanese in various battles throughout the Pacific.“We were here 75 years ago, and to be back carrying on the tradition is an honor,” Skalicky said.Accompanying the F-22s here are approximately 200 Airmen providing operational, maintenance, logistical and security support. The F-22s are scheduled to be in Australia through the beginning of March.F-22 



Navy 



Australia 



RAAF 



JB Elmendorf-Richardson 



RAAF Base Tindal 



Force Posture Agreement 



F/A-18 



PACAF
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>            5
<MULTIPLIER>         1
       
<S>                         <C>   
<PERIOD-TYPE>               3-MOS            
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                          APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1997                     
<CASH>                                         2261
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                334559
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                  218554
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            1442913    
<PP&E>                                      1416726                            
<DEPRECIATION>                              1241518
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              2014359    
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        166739
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                       3350
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                        0                    
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                2014359
<SALES>                                      294160
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             298669 
<CGS>                                        200602
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                324726  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1614
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (26057)  
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (7000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                (19057)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (.01)            
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.01)
        

</TABLE>