alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00272-CR

Victor Campos

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

148th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 13CR3446-E

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 16, 2015
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 1 of 16 PageID: 1
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 2 of 16 PageID: 2
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 3 of 16 PageID: 3
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 4 of 16 PageID: 4
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 5 of 16 PageID: 5
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 6 of 16 PageID: 6
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 7 of 16 PageID: 7
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 8 of 16 PageID: 8
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 9 of 16 PageID: 9
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 10 of 16 PageID: 10
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 11 of 16 PageID: 11
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 12 of 16 PageID: 12
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 13 of 16 PageID: 13
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 14 of 16 PageID: 14
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 15 of 16 PageID: 15
Case 2:11-cv-00137-FSH -PS Document 1 Filed 01/07/11 Page 16 of 16 PageID: 16
# table158_q16.2_state
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.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [Docket 20-2009 and 22-2009]

A public hearing will be held on the applications for subzone authority at the Dow Corning Corporation (Dow Corning) facilities in Carrollton, Elizabethtown and Shepherdsville, Kentucky (74 FR 21621-21622, 5/8/09) and at the REC Silicon facility in Moses Lake, Washington (74 FR 25488-25489, 5/28/09). The Commerce examiner will hold the public hearing on September 1, 2009 at 1 p.m., at the Department of Commerce, Room 4830, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230. Interested parties should indicate their intent to participate in the hearing and provide a summary of their remarks no later than August 28, 2009.

The comment period for the cases referenced above is being extended to September 16, 2009, to allow interested parties additional time in which to comment. Rebuttal comments may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period, until October 1, 2009. Submissions (original and one electronic copy) shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 2111, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230.

                    For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at                     *Elizabeth_Whiteman@ita.doc.gov*                     or (202) 482-0473.                

Dated: June 30, 2009.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. E9-15966 Filed 7-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
Exhibit 32.01
                                                                  -------------


                                 CERTIFICATION

     I, Gary D. Halbert, the President of ProFutures, Inc., as general partner
of ProFutures Diversified Fund, L.P., certify that (i) the Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2005 of ProFutures Diversified Fund, L.P.. fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2005 fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of ProFutures Diversified
Fund, L.P.



                                    PROFUTURES DIVERSIFIED FUND, L.P.

                                    By: ProFutures, Inc., general partner



                                    By: /s/ Gary D. Halbert

                                        ---------------------------------
                                        Gary D. Halbert
                                        President
                                        March 29, 2006
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

 

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, the undersigned officer of Owens-Illinois, Inc. (the “Company”)hereby certifies that to such officer’s knowledge:

 

(i)                                     the Annual Report on Form 10-K of theCompany for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(ii)                                  the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  February 17, 2009 | /s/  Albert P.L. Stroucken                                      |
|--------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|                           | Albert P.L. Stroucken                                           |
|                           | Chairman  of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer |
|                           | Owens-Illinois, Inc.                                       |

 

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7**  **224**

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , P laintiff

- Appellee ,
v. LACARLOS DEMOND CURETON, a/k/a Loco , Defendant

- Appell ant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Rock Hill
. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. , District Judge. ( 0:02

- cr - 01173

- JFA

- 7 )

Submitted : January 18, 2011 Decided: January 26, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN , and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Affirm ed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Lacarlos Demond Cureton , Appellant Pro Se
. Jimmie Ewing, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina , for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Lacarlos De mond Curet on appeals the district court ’ s order denying his motion to compel the Government to file a Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Uni ted States v. Cureton , No. 0:02

- cr - 01173

- JFA

- 7 (D.S.C. Aug. 25, 2010) . 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.
AFF IRMED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

IN RE: CONSOLIDATED RETURN OF

THE TAX CLAIM BUREAU OF THE

COUNTY OF BEAVER FROM THE

AUGUST 16, 2011 UPSET SALE FOR

DELINQUENT TAXES 

EILEEN BATTISTI

v.

BEAVER COUNTY TAX CLAIM BUREAU

AND S.P. LEWIS

PETITION OF: S.P. LEWIS

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 11 WAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
---

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Ronald A. Durando, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of mPhase Technologies,
  Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
  of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
  statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
  were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
  information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
  the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
  registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
  establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
  Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant's and have:

> Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
>     disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
>     ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
>     consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
>     entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
>     prepared;
>     Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
>     procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
>     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
>     the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
>     Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
>     over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
>     fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
>     annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
>     materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
>     reporting; and

1. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
  our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
  the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
  directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

1. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
  operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
  likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
  summarize and report financial information; and
2. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
  employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
  over financial reporting.

/s/ Ronald A. Durando
__________________
Ronald A. Durando 
Chief Executive Officer

November 15, 2004

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.7



                            EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE
                          INGLES MARKETS, INCORPORATED
                         INVESTMENT/PROFIT SHARING PLAN

         THIS EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE INGLES MARKETS, INCORPORATED
INVESTMENT/PROFIT SHARING PLAN (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan"), which
Plan was amended and restated in its entirety effective September 26, 1993, and
was subsequently amended by the First through Seventh Amendments, is made and
entered into by Ingles Markets, Incorporated (the "Employer").

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

         WHEREAS, Section 6.1 of the Plan permits the Employer to amend the
Plan from time to time and Section 6.3 of the Plan permits the Employer to
amend the Plan on behalf of all participating Employers.

         WHEREAS, the Employer desires to amend the Plan to allow payment to an
Alternate Payee in the event of the Disability of the Alternate Payee.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Employer hereby amends the Plan as follows:

         1.  Section 5.11 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following
paragraph to the end thereof:

             "An Alternate Payee may receive a distribution of his or her
             interest under the Plan while the Participant remains employed by
             Employer but prior to the Earliest Retirement Age of the
             Participant under one exception. If an Alternate Payee shall be
             certified as disabled by the Social Security Administration at any
             time following the receipt of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order,
             the Alternate Payee may receive a distribution of his or her
             interest under the Plan as provided by the Qualified Domestic
             Relations Order without regard to the status of the Participant. In
             no event shall such disability include a condition resulting from
             self-inflicted injury, or injury incurred while committing an
             illegal act.

         2.  The effective date of this Eighth Amendment shall be May 1, 2001.

         3.  Except as specifically amended above, the Plan shall remain
unchanged and, as amended herein, shall continue in full force and effect.


                                       1
<PAGE>
         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Ingles Markets, Incorporated has caused this
Eighth Amendment to the Plan to be executed by its duly authorized officer this
21st day of May, 2001.

                                             EMPLOYER:
                                             INGLES MARKETS, INCORPORATED



                                             By: /s/ Brenda S. Tudor
                                                 ------------------------------
                                             Title: CFO
                                                    ---------------------------


                                       2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,072,577
<SECURITIES>                                 8,506,853
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,561
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,133,138
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,690,796
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          156,346
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,534,450
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,690,796
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,001,936
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               172,499
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                829,437
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            829,437
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   829,437
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
exh_1040.htm


Exhibit 10.40


 



SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT







This Second Amendment (“Amendment”) to the Employment Agreement by and between NetSol Technologies, Inc. (“Netsol” or the “Company”) and Patti L. W. McGlasson (“Executive”), dated July 25, 2013 (the “Employment Agreement”) is entered into effective as of the date indicted below.  Other than the specific amendments enumerated in the Amendment, all of the terms of the Employment Agreement shall remain in the full force and effect, and shall not be obviated or affected by this Amendment.







In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the Employment Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall govern.  All capitalized terms contained herein are, unless otherwise stated, as defined in the Agreement.







Now therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:







Section 3.1 shall be amended to read as follows:







3.1           The Company shall pay, effective July 1, 2013, an increase in base salary of 20%, to One Hundred Seventy-One Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($171,600) per year (the "Base Salary"), payable in accordance with the Company policy.  Such salary shall be pro rated for any partial year of employment on the basis of a 365-day fiscal year.  Executive will be eligible for bonuses from time to time as determined by the Board.







A new section 3.10 shall be added to read as follows:







3.10           Executive shall be granted ten thousand shares (10,000) of common stock to vest in equal 25% tranches (2,500) upon the conclusion of each quarter of service.  The shares are granted from the Company’s 2013 Equity Incentive Plan.  The Shares shall be granted in tranches of 2,500 shares on October 1, 2013; the next 2,500 on January 1, 2014; the next 2,500 on April 1, 2014 and the final 2,500 shares on July 1, 2013.













 




  





  











  






The Amendment is agreed to on July 25, 2013, and shall become effective as of the date first written above.


 







 


Employee


 







 


By:  /s/Patti L. W. McGlasson


Patti L. W. McGlasson


 







 


NetSol Technologies, Inc.


 







 


By:  /s/Najeeb Ghauri                                                                           By:  /s/Boo-Ali Siddiqui


Najeeb Ghauri                                                                                         Boo-Ali Siddiqui


Chief Executive Officer                                                                          Chief Financial Officer
#### Wheeler *against*Lampman.

NEW-YORK,

October, 1817.

The appearance of the return of t¡ce»8,ncour¿Uin an objection te the sufficiency ?f the return, thew°$je" c°u¡8aü°action tof°recoi«%Cne bankUDnote°paia to tbedpiTMndtm; thatitwasa°¡od t¡céy’is no8 Jaui thorized to give judgment for the plaintiff on ba£¿ thenote.

IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court.

The defendant in error brought an action, in the court below, the plaintiff in error, by summons, which was returned by one *De Grote,*who is stated to be a constable, in these words; *J*b 56 personally, as the law directs, by. me, S* *De GroteS**The cíefendant below, by his attorney, appeared on the return of the for the purpose of objecting to the constable’s return, and the objection was made and overruled, by the justice, who decided that the return was sufficient. The plaintiff below then declared that the defendant had passed to him a counterfeit three dollar bank note, which he had refused to take back; and after issue joined, and an adjournment,'the cause was tried by the justice, who gave judgment for the defendant in error.

*Per*Curiam.

e Two exceptions are taken to the justice’s return: 1. That the constable’s return to the summons was insufficient; and, 2. That there was no proof that the bill was a forgery.

As to the first point. The statute requires, “ that the serving such summons, shall, upon the oath of his office, thereupon the time and manner he executed the same, &c.” The appearance of the plaintiff below, merely for the purpose of making the objection, was not a waiver of the irregularity of the return, and as the statute is peremptory that the time when the summons is served shall be returned thereupon, its injunc-tions must be obeyed. If the defendant below, had waived the irregularity by pleading to the declaration, without objeefing to the return, it would have been too "late to make the objection now. There is a good reason for holding a constable to a strict compliance with the terms of the statute in this respect. Iiis *486return is not traversable, and he is liable to an action for a pa]se returtl) jf the summons has not been served six days previous to the return day. The defendant, therefore, has a right, to demand that the constable shall specifically state the time when the summons was served.

2. There is very little, if any, evidence that the bill was a forgery, and the justice seems to have founded his opinion on this point, upon his own inspection of it. He does not say that the proof satisfied him; and it is to be presumed he would not be willing to say so. He had no right to give judgment upon proof of this nature, and the'judgment must, therefore, be reversed.

Judgment reversed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             894
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      984
<ALLOWANCES>                                       107
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          32,487
<DEPRECIATION>                                (25,815)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,858
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,656
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,202
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,949
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,955
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    30
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    934
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                934
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       934
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10


</TABLE>
@misc{11331,
  author = {Michal Chojnacky},
  title = {Thermal Analysis of a Small Pharmaceutical Refrigerator for Vaccine Storage},
  year = {2012},
  month = {2012-11-23},
  publisher = {NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NISTIR), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.7900},
  language = {en},
}