alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
July 23, 2015

Twelfth Court of Appeals

1517 W Front St Ste 354

Tyler TX 75702-7854

Re: Rachel Michelle Kirksey

 12-14-00354-CR and 12-14-00349-CR

To The Honorable Clerk of the Court:

Please find enclosed a copy of the letter sent to my client regarding his right to file a PDR along 

with a copy of the certified return receipt showing the mailing of the same. 

Sincerely,

/s/Austin Reeve Jackson

ACCEPTED

12-14-00354-CR

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

7/23/2015 2:21:10 PM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 7/23/2015 2:21:10 PM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk

July 23, 2015

Rachel Michelle Kirksey

3301 Mineola Highway

#408

Tyler, TX 75702

Re: Opinion

 

Ms. Kirksey: 

Please find enclosed a copy of opinion issued by the Court of Appeals in your case. The Court 

has affirmed your conviction.

Should you desire to do so, you do have the right to file a pro se Petition for Discretionary 

Review in the Court of Criminal Appeals. If you decide to pursue that option you must file your 

petition prior to the expiration of thirty days from the date of the court’s opinion.

I would be happy to address any questions or concerns you have if you will simply let me know. 

Sincerely,

Austin Reeve Jackson
#### Glaenzer *et al. v.*Wiederer *et al.*

*(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.*

November 1, 1887.)

Patents for Inventions—Infringement—Preliminary Injunction.

Where on a bill to restrain infringement, of a patent, it appears from, the defense made that complainant’s patent will be very narrowly sustained, if at all, a preliminary injunction will be denied.

In Equity. On hill for injunction.

Plaintiffs, Jules Glaenzer and another, filed their bill against Peter Wiederer and another, to enjoin defendants from infringing letters patent No. 182,638, dated September 26, 1876, issued to P. L. Broi, assignee of L. T. Berton, for a compound folding mirror, which plaintiffs now claim to own. The hearing is on a motion for a preliminary injunction.

*Eaton & Lewis,*for plaintiffs.

*Qoepel & Raeyener,*for defendants.

Lacombe, J.

Complainant, on his application for preliminary injunction, refers to the decision of Judge Wheeler in *hall*v. *Stern,*15 Fed. Rep. 463, sustaining this patent. Additional evidence, however, which was, not before the court in that case, is here presented. If, in view of that new proof, complainant’s patent is to be sustained at all, it mast be sustained by so narrow a margin as hardly to warrant a decision in his favor in advance of the trial. In view of this condition of affairs, and. of the other questions raised on the motion, the application for injunction is denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                EXHIBIT 10.101


                   AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

        THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of this 31st day of December,
1995, by and between MICHAEL FOODS, INC., a Delaware corporation (hereinafter
referred to as "Michael Foods"), and JEFFREY M. SHAPIRO (hereinafter referred to
as "Shapiro").

        WHEREAS, Michael Foods and Shapiro have heretofore entered into an
employment agreement dated as of December 31, 1994; and

        WHEREAS, Michael Foods and Shapiro desire to amend Sections 2 and 3 of
said agreement to amend and clarify certain terms thereof.

        NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the terms and
conditions set forth, the parties agree as follows:

        1.  Section 2 of the employment agreement between Michael Foods and
Shapiro dated December 31, 1994 is hereby amended by substituting the following
for the phrase "shall continue through December 31, 1996": 

        shall continue through December 31, 1997

        2.  Section 3 of the employment agreement between Michael Foods and
Shapiro dated December 31, 1994 is hereby amended by substituting the following
for the phrase "for each of the calendar years of this Agreement from January 1,
1995 through December 31, 1996 of at least $238,000":

        for each of the calendar years of this Agreement from January 1,
        1996 through December 31, 1997 of at least $250,000

Except as otherwise provided herein, the employment agreement between Michael
Foods and Shapiro dated December 31, 1994 shall remain in full force and effect.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the date
and year above written.


                                         MICHAEL FOODS, INC.
                                        

                                         BY: /s/ Gregg A. Ostrander
                                            ----------------------------------

                                            Its       PRESIDENT/CEO
                                                ------------------------------

                                             /s/ Jeffrey M. Shapiro
                                            ----------------------------------
                                                   JEFFREY M. SHAPIRO
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00277-CV

Eleazar Vasquez

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

404th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 03-CR-1173-G

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed in part and reversed 

and remanded in part. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED IN 

PART and REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

twenty-five percent against appellant although he is exempt from payment due to his 

affidavit of inability to pay costs and seventy-five percent against appellee and it is 

ordered to pay its costs of the appeal from which it is not exempt by statute.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 23, 2015
36 Occupational Outlook Quarterly ● Fall 2000

Fastest growing occupations usually requiring a bachelor’s degreeor more education, projected 1998-2008Occupations usually requiring abachelor’s degree or more educationare projected to be among the fastestgrowing between 1998 and 2008. Fastgrowing occupations usually havebetter employment prospects andmore favorable conditions for mobilityand advancement than do occupationswith slow or declining employment.

As the chart shows, computer-related occupations lead the growthamong occupations requiring abachelor’s degree or more education.Health-related occupations are alsoamong the fastest growing—in fact,nearly half of the 20 fastest growingoccupations in this education andtraining category are computer- orhealth-related. The remaining ones arefrom a wide range of fields, including 2each in education, social services, anddesign.

 These 20 occupations are expectedto account for 38 percent of all newjobs in occupations requiring at least abachelor’s degree.

Speech-language pathologists and audiologists

Computer engineers 108 323

Computer systems analysts 94 577

Database administrators 77 67

Physician assistants 48 32

Residential counselors 46 88

Engineering, natural science, and computerand information systems managers 43 142

41 124

38 40

Social workers 36 218

Biological scientists 35 28

Occupational therapists 34 25

Physical therapists 34 41

Teachers, special education 34 137

Medical and health services managers 33 74

Computer programmers 30 191

Management analysts 28 98

Interior designers 27 15

Designers, except interior designers 27 91

Teachers, preschool 27 92

Electrical and electronics engineers 26 93

Total, all occupations requiring a bachelor’sdegee or more education 21 6,611

Percentchange

Numericchange(thousands)Occupation

Securities, commodities, and financialservices sales agents
|  | 1.  | The      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, for the fiscal quarter ended August 31,      2010, and to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations      of the Company. |
|--|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/      Gordon Samson            |
|--------|-----------------------------------|
|   | Chief      Financial Officer and  |
|   | Principal      Accounting Officer |
|   | January      10, 2011             |

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Zachary Lewis, Also Known as Scotty Brown, Appellant.

[854 NYS2d 383]

Defendant made valid written and oral waivers of his right to appeal *(see People v Ramos,*7 NY3d 737 [2006]; *People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248 [2006]), which foreclose his suppression claims. In a thorough colloquy, the court carefully explained to defendant that the right to appeal was separate from the rights automatically forfeited by pleading guilty, and that, in consideration of the plea, defendant was giving up his right to appellate review of the court’s suppression ruling. To the extent that defendant is arguing that this Court should entertain his suppression arguments regardless of the waiver, that argument is without merit *(see People v Holman,*89 NY2d 876 [1996]). As an alternative holding, we also reject defendant’s suppression claims on the merits. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Buckley and Catterson, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of  ONLINE  ORIGINALS,  INC.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  February 28, 2007, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Gaye Adams,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

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

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


Date:    April 16, 2007


By:      /s/ Gaye Adams
         ----------------------------
         Gaye Adams
         Chief Executive Officer, principal executive officer
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 The Topps Company, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for
the year ended March 3, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Catherine K. Jessup, Vice President-Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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, 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/ Catherine K. Jessup
                      Catherine K. JessupVice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:  May 31, 2007

---
JEROME J. FERRIER,

Appellant,

v.

THE PUBLIC DEFENDER'S 

OFFICE, SECOND JUDICIAL 

CIRCUIT 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. 1D15-88

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 14, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Charles A. Francis, Judge.

Jerome J. Ferrier, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Nancy A. Daniels, Public 

Defender, and Carrie McMullen, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for 

Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the circuit court’s denial of Appellant’s petition for 

writ of mandamus compelling the Public Defender’s Office to comply with 
2

Appellant’s public records request seeking various discovery material. The Public 

Defender’s Office filed an unsworn response to the mandamus petition arguing that 

it did not possess some of the requested materials and that it had provided Appellant 

with copies of the requested materials that were in its possession. The trial court 

denied the petition, reasoning that the issuance of a writ of mandamus would be 

improper where there was an unresolved factual dispute. 

We agree with Appellant that the circuit court erred in not conducting an 

evidentiary hearing on the contested issue of whether the Public Defender’s Officer 

had the requested materials in its possession. Clay County Educ. Ass’n v. Clay 

County Sch. Bd., 144 So. 3d 708, 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (reversing the dismissal 

of a petition for writ of mandamus based on a response that the School Board had 

already turned over the documents, the documents did not exist in the formant 

requested, or the documents did not exist and remanding for an evidentiary 

hearing); Johanson v. State, 872 So. 2d 387, 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (reversing the 

denial of a petition for writ of mandamus based on an unsworn response filed by the 

State that it did not possess the records requested and remanding for an evidentiary 

hearing, including an in camera inspection of the state attorney’s file, to determine 

who possessed the required records). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial 

and remand for an evidentiary hearing. We affirm all other issues raised on appeal 

without further discussion.
3

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

LEWIS, ROWE, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6446

JOVAN CORNELIUS SIMON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

L/CPL KEVIN PAIGE, SCHP; TROOPER BUCKY GEDDINGS, SCHP; L/CPL 

MARK JENNINGS, SCHP; AGENT H. ERIC COHOON, ATF; SOUTH CAROLINA 

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Beaufort. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. 

(9:13-cv-03025-RMG)

Submitted: July 21, 2015 Decided: July 24, 2015

Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jovan Cornelius Simon, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Bass Lohr, HOWELL, 

GIBSON & HUGHES, PA, Beaufort, South Carolina; Barbara Murcier 

Bowens, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South 

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jovan Cornelius Simon appeals the magistrate judge’s text 

order denying his motion to compel and the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on his complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012),

and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 

403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Simon v. Paige, No. 9:13-cv-03025-RMG

(D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2014; Mar. 13, 2015). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
ACCEPTED14-15-00271-CVFOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALSHOUSTON, TEXAS7/21/2015 8:12:48 AMCHRISTOPHER PRINECLERK
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 125 (Wednesday, July 1, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31451-31452]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15569]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Autoimmune Microbiome.
    Date: August 11, 2009.
    Time: 12 p.m. to 2 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Robert Wellner, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 757, 
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-4721, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d6a4a1e7e1e3a196b8bfbef8b1b9a0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="03717432343674436d6a6b2d646c75">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


[[Page 31452]]


    Dated: June 24, 2009.
Anna Snouffer,
Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-15569 Filed 6-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
A fiscal 2001 Executive Officers Incentive Bonus Plan has been established, with
the payments to be made after the close of fiscal 2001.  Each Executive  Officer
will  receive a bonus of between  zero and 60% of their  base  salary for fiscal
2000.  This  payment  will be based  on the  Company  achieving  pre-established
figures for  Consolidated  Operating  Profit  (income  before  interest,  taxes,
depreciation  and  amortization)  for each of the Core  Businesses  (Sports  and
Non-Licensed Confectionery) and Other Businesses (all other). Executive Officers
will not receive a bonus if the Company fails to attain a minimum Core Operating
Profit regardless of the level of Consolidated Operating Income.
## U nit edSta tes C ou rt o f A pp eal s For t h e Firs t C ircu it

No. 07-1384 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v . JAMES TAMBONE AND ROBERT HUSSEY, Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET The opinion en banc of this Court issued on March 10, 2010, is amended as follows: On page 40, line 1, insert a second "R" in Judge Torruella's last name to read: "TORRUELLA"
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350

and Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mavenir Systems, Inc. (Mavenir) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2013, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Terry Hungle, as Chief Financial Officer of Mavenir, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b), that
to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Dated: December 05, 2013



|   |  |                        
|-- |  | -----------------------
|By |  | /s/ Terry Hungle       
|   |  | Terry Hungle           
|   |  | Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies this report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be
deemed to be filed by Mavenir for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This certification is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Mavenir under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this report), except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
filing.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 906**

**of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Primoris Services Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter J. Moerbeek,Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Director of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

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

 

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

 

In witness whereof, theundersigned has executed and delivered this certificate as of the date setforth opposite his signature below.

 
| Date: May 10, 2010 | /s/ PETER J. MOERBEEK                                                              |
|-------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                    | Peter J. Moerbeek*Executive Vice President, Chief Financial  Officer and Director* |

 

----