alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals** 
**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

INTELLECTUAL VENTURE S II LLC, Appellant

v.

FEDEX CORPORATION, Appellee

UNITED STATES,

Intervenor

______________________

2018

- 2373

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2017

- 00787.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

K EVIN K ENT M C N ISH

, Desmarais LLP, New York, NY, argued for appellant. Also represented by A LAN K ELLMAN

.

D ANIEL C. T UCKER

, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Reston, VA, argued for appellee. Also represented by J EFFREY A. B ERK OWITZ

, M ICHAEL
V INCENT Y OUNG

, S R

. , J OSEPH M ICHAEL S CHAFFNER

.D ENNIS F AN

, Appellate Staff, Civil Division, United

States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for intervenor. Also represented by S COTT R. M C I NTOSH

, J OSEPH H. H UNT ; T HOMAS W. K RAUSE

, F ARHEENA Y ASMEEN
R ASHEED , Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (L OURIE

, R EYNA

, and H UGHES

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

December 10, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Date Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court
**Geographic Area Coordination CenterChecklist #03**

**Geographic Area Coordination CenterChecklist #03**

For the National Preparedness Review you will need to have the following items available for review.

**3-1Revised 2010**

**3-2Revised 2010**
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of WNC California Housing
Tax Credits III, L.P. (the  "Partnership")  for the year ended March 31, 2007 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  and  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,  section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I,  Wilfred N.  Cooper,  Jr.,
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner
of the Partnership, hereby certify that:

     1.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  except to the extent
          that such  provisions  require  the  audit  reports  of Local  Limited
          Partnership  financial  statements  to refer to the  standards  of the
          Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.

     2.   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Partnership.




/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.
-------------------------
Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
March 6, 2008
Exhibit 32 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 Annual report of Lipidviro Tech, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), I, Kenneth Hamik, President, Chief Executive Officer and director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  Date:March 27, 2008By:/s/Kenneth HamikKenneth Hamik, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 7, 2022

No. 04

- 21

- 00554

- CV

COMPLEX REHAB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC

,

Appellant

v.

Tomas MOLINA

, Appellee

From the 73rd Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020CI23933

Honorable Cynthia Marie Chapa , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvar ez , Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Lori I. Valenzuela, Just ice

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is DENIED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 49.3.

_________________________________ Beth Watkins , Justice

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

court on this 7th day of September, 2022

.

___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz

, Clerk of Court
NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION

CHAIR’S NOTICE – Chairman E. Sequoyah Simermeyer

Visit www.NIGC.gov to learn more about the NIGC 3 For 35 Project— a 

year-long project emphasizing the importance of conversations among 

the tribal gaming regulatory community about workforce preparedness.

Date: June 22, 2023

Re: Wisconsin Gaming Regulator’s Association 2023 Conference

Today I delivered an NIGC update to the Wisconsin Gaming Regulators 

Association (WGRA) 2023 Conference, hosted by Ho-Chunk Gaming -

Wisconsin Dells. I want to sincerely thank WGRA Chairman Powless and 

the Ho-Chunk Nation for their hospitality and organizing this 

beneficial event.

I am grateful for the chance NIGC has to participate in training and 

for the opportunity to address WGRA members this morning about 

potential future NIGC activity and share some perspectives as a 

national regulator on the threats and opportunities that technology 

creates for all gaming regulators. A copy of my presentation is 

available here.

During my presentation I spoke of NIGC’s 1997 public hearing to 

discuss timely technology matters impacting gaming regulation at 

that time. The testimony provides valuable insights into policy 

considerations and industry stakeholder positions on the topic of 

internet gaming as well as federal law makers’ intent when enacting 

the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) nearly ten years earlier.

I also discussed the threat that technology innovation exacerbates 

when it makes illegal gaming devices in unregulated spaces more 

accessible. We have the opportunity as tribal, federal, and state 

regulators to promote the importance of the consistent enforcement 

of our respective regulations and laws.

Wisconsin and Tribal Nations located in the state have played a 

leadership role in the national gaming agenda for many decades, and 

ARE(is) also a proving ground for some of the best practices in 

gaming regulation at both the tribal and state levels. I enjoyed my 

visit and wish the Wisconsin regulatory community well.

###
CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM






We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
      333-123348 on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 27, 2006, relating to
      the
      financial statements (and with respect to the report on those financial
      statements, expressed an unqualified opinion and included an explanatory
      paragraph concerning the adoption of new accounting pronouncements in 2003
      and
      2004) and financial statement schedule of Appalachian Power Company and
      subsidiaries appearing in and incorporated by reference in the Annual Report
      on
      Form 10-K of Appalachian Power Company and subsidiaries for the year ended
      December 31, 2005.













/s/
      Deloitte & Touche




Columbus,
      Ohio


February
      28, 2006
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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

PONY LEO JACKSON,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 10-30258

D.C. No. 4:09-cr-00131-BLW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho

B. Lynn Winmill, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 15, 2011** 

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. 

Pony Leo Jackson appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following

his guilty-plea conviction for possession of sexually explicit images of minors, in

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C.§ 1291, and we affirm. 

FILED

JUN 23 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-30258

Jackson contends that the district court procedurally erred in calculating the

Sentencing Guidelines range when it assessed criminal history points for a prior

offense, rather than counting it as relevant conduct. This contention lacks merit

because the district court properly counted Jackson’s Wyoming conviction for

possession of child pornography as a prior sentence rather than as relevant conduct. 

See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(1) and cmt. n.1; U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3, cmt. n.9(B); see also

United States v. Hahn, 960 F.2d 903, 910-911 (9th Cir. 1992). 

Jackson also contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable

because: (1) the district court failed to consider the government’s delay in bringing

the charges, thereby exposing him to increased punishment from the application of

a Sentencing Guidelines enhancement due to a subsequent state conviction; and (2)

failed to account for the three years he spent in prison on relevant conduct. The

district court declined to second-guess the government’s decision with respect to

the timing of its charging decision and, as discussed supra, Jackson’s earlier prison

sentence did not arise from conduct that is relevant to the instant offense. The

sentence at the statutory maximum, which was below the applicable Guidelines

range, was not unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007);

see also United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.
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 Annual Report of Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to her knowledge:



| | 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 operation of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|               |  |  |  |     |  |                                         
|-------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------
|March 16, 2011 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Marliss D. Johnson                  
|               |  |  |  |     |  | Vice President, Controller and Treasurer
|               |  |  |  |     |  | Marliss D. Johnson                      



|                                      |  |  |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  |  |  | 
|ampco pittsburgh | 2010 annual report |  |  |  |
| (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. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |                                                                                              |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                              |   |
|   | By:    | /s/ Paul      Mendez                                                                         |   |
|   |   | Paul      Mendez,Chief      Executive OfficerSynergx      Systems Inc.Date:      February 9, 2010 |   |
|   |   |                                                                                              |   |
|   |   |                                                                                              |   |

|   |   |                                                                                        |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                        |   |
|   | By:    | /s/ John      A. Poserina                                                              |   |
|   |   | John      A. Poserina,                                                                      |   |
|   |   | Chief      Financial OfficerSynergx      Systems Inc.Date:  February      9, 2010 |   |
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


In connection with the Quarterly Report of CHS
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended November 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, John Schmitz, Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:



| |                                                                                                                                                                
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) The Report fully complies with the
    requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
    Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
|
| | (2) The information contained in the Report
    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
    condition and result of operations of the Company.



| |                                                         
| | --------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ JOHN SCHMITZ                                        
| |                                                         
| | John Schmitz                                            
| | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
    Officer

January 12, 2004
#### In the Matter of Angelina J. St. Vincent’s Services, Inc., et al., Respondents; Frantz J., Appellant.

[977 NYS2d 755]

In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate the mother’s parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Danoff, J.), dated May 21, 2012, as, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, determined that he was not a father whose consent to the adoption of the subject child was required pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 111 and transferred guardianship and custody of the subject child to the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York and St. Vincent’s Services, Inc., for the purpose of adoption.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court’s determination that the father’s consent *933to the adoption of the subject child was not required is supported by clear and convincing evidence *(see Matter of Janelle C. [Sean R.],*88 AD3d 787 [2011]). The father failed to meet his burden of establishing that he maintained substantial and continuous or repeated contact with the child through the payment of support and either regular visitation or other communication with the child *(see*Domestic Relations Law § 111 [1] [d]; *Matter of Seasia D.,*10 NY3d 879, 880 [2008]; *Matter of Julian J.C. [Juan C.],*96 AD3d 937, 938 [2012]; *Matter of Martin V.L. [Martin L.],*88 AD3d 714, 715 [2011]; *Matter of Jaden Dasani-Amru B. [Roy Alphonso B.],*74 AD3d 801, 802 [2010]). Mastro, J.E, Rivera, Leventhal and Chambers, JJ., concur.
JAMARL W. VAUGHN , Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
CASE NO. 1D 14

- 4269

_______ ______________________/ Opinion filed March 5, 2015. An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County

. J. Bradford Stetson , Judge

. Jamarl W. Vaughn, pro se , Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Kristen Bonjour, Assistant Attor ney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. Jamarl W. Vaughn appeals the summary denial of his motion seeking postconviction relief brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure
3.850

. We affirm, without comment, the postconviction c ourt’s denial of theappellant’s second , third , and fourth grounds for relief. However, we reverse for further proceedings as to the first ground.
In the Appellant’s first claim for relief , he argued that his attorney failed to convey a favorable plea offe r that was extended by the S tate in 2009 . The trial court denied this claim, finding it incredible because it did not specifically describe the sentence contemplated by the offer and concluding that the claim was also refuted by the record. W hile the trans cripts attached to the trial court’s order
confirm that defense counsel informed the trial court just prior to trial that the S tate
made a plea offer in 2009, there is no indication that this offer had been conveyed
to the A ppellant.
A claim that counsel performed deficiently in failing to convey a plea offer is cognizable in a postconviction motion. See Morgan v. State , 991 So. 2d 835 , 839

- 40 (Fla. 2008), receded from on other grounds by Alcorn v. State , 121 So. 3d
419 , 433 (Fla. 2013). Further, w hile A pp ellant’s claim regarding the plea offer lacks specific details and fails to properly allege prejudice , this should be resolved by offering him an opportunity to amend rather than denying his unrefuted claim
on the merits

. See Spera v. State , 971 So. 2d 754 , 761

- 62 (Fla. 2007) (concluding that a defendant should be entitled to at least one opportunity to amend a facially insufficient and unrefuted postconviction claim); Ha r rell v. State , 21 So. 3d 166, 169 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (concluding that the denial of a facially insufficient claim

2that was not conclusively refuted by the record should be reversed and remanded to provide the appellant with an opportunity to amend). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’ s summary denial of ground one and
remand for furth er proceedings

. AFFIRMED in part ; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

LEWIS, C.J. , and BENTON , J. , CONCUR; THOMAS, J. , DISSENTS WITHOUT OPINION.

3
Document

Exhibit 10.2

Summary of Director Compensation
of
Ameris Bancorp
Effective April 14, 2022


Directors who are employees of Ameris Bancorp (the “Company”) do not receive additional compensation for serving as directors of the Company. Compensation for the Company’s non-employee directors is comprised of the following components:


•Annual Cash Retainer — each non-employee director receives an annual cash retainer at a rate of $60,000 per year
•Annual Equity Retainer — each non-employee director receives an annual award of time-based restricted stock with a value of approximately $75,000, vesting on the earlier of (i) the one-year anniversary of the date of grant and (ii) the date of the Company’s next annual shareholders’ meeting
•Non-executive Chairman — receives an additional cash retainer of $80,000
•Lead Independent Director — receives an additional annual cash retainer of $45,000
•Committee Chair Retainer — the chair of each committee, if not an employee of the Company, receives an additional annual cash retainer at the rate set forth below:
◦Audit — $30,000 per year.
◦Compensation — $20,000 per year.
◦Corporate Governance and Nominating — $20,000 per year.
◦Enterprise Risk — $30,000 per year.
◦Executive — $10,000 per year.
◦Trust — $10,000 per year.

Community Boards — each non-employee director with membership on one of Ameris Bank’s community boards receives an additional monthly fee of $400, or $600 if serving as chair.

Cash retainers payable to non-employee directors are prorated in any year in which the board or committee chair appointment is not effective for the entirety of such year.