alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Rodriguez, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 755]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered November 24, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 10 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the DNA databank fee, and otherwise affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the court’s justification charge is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that although, under the facts presented, defendant was entitled to a charge on use of force in defense against a robbery *(see*Penal Law § 35.15 [2] [b]), the absence of such charge did not prejudice defendant “[b]ecause there was overwhelming evidence disproving the justification defense and no reasonable possibility that the verdict would have been different had the charge been correctly given” *(People v Petty,*7 NY3d 277, 286 [2006]). For the same reason, counsel’s failure to request a charge on defense against a robbery did not constitute ineffective assistance under the state and federal standards *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; *see also Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668 [1984]).

*390Since the crime was committed prior to the effective date of the legislation (Penal Law § 60.35 [1] [a] [v] [former (1) (e)]), providing for the imposition of a DNA databank fee, that fee should not have been imposed by the judgment, as the court recognized at sentencing. Concur—Tom, J.E, Saxe, Friedman, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.
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 on Form 10-K of AmTrust Financial Services,
Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald
Pipoly, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting 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:
  (a)
              the Report fully complies with
      the requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934; and
  (b)
              the information contained in the
      Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of the
Company.
  By:
                  /s/ Ronald
      PipolyRonald
      Pipoly
                    Chief
      Financial Officer
                    (Principal
      Financial and Accounting
Officer)
  August
10, 2009
Case 2:10-cv-03984-FSH -PS Document 41 Filed 12/20/10 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 571
Case 2:10-cv-03984-FSH -PS Document 41 Filed 12/20/10 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 572
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION FOR EN BANC RECONSIDERATION 

Appellate case name: In the Matter of the Marriage of Allan Ray Comstock and Mindy Lee 

Comstock

Appellate case number: 01-19-00722-CV

Trial court case number: 15-FD-3019

Trial court: County Court at Law No. 1 of Galveston County

Date motion filed: October 29, 2021

Party filing motion: Appellant

It is ordered that the motion for en banc reconsideration is DENIED GRANTED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ April L. Farris 

 Acting Individually Acting for the Court

A majority of the justices of the Court voted to deny the motion for en banc reconsideration.

The En Banc Court consists of: Chief Justice Radack and Justices Kelly, Goodman, Landau, 

Hightower, Countiss, Rivas-Molloy, Guerra, and Farris.

Justice Goodman, voting to grant en banc reconsideration.

Date: December 9, 2021
#### In re FUSION-IO, INC., Petitioner.

Misc. No. 146.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 27, 2013.

Michael Hawes, Attorney, Baker Botts, LLP, Houston, TX, David Schlitz, Baker Botts, LLP, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.

David Sochia, Esq., Attorney, McKool Smith, P.C., Dallas, TX, for Solid State Storage Solutions, Inc.

ON PETITION

ORDER

Upon consideration of Fusion-io, Inc.’s motion to withdraw its petition for a writ of mandamus,

It Is ordered That:

The motion is granted.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF TREASURER PURSUANT TO SECURITIES
ACT RULES 13A-14 AND 15D-14 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of the Partnership;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
periods 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 officers 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 and have:
 a)
    
    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;b)
    
    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; andc)
    
    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
 5.
    
    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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
 a)
    
    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; andb)
    
    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.
 Date:  March 23, 2007
    /s/ Steven L. BrakeSteven L. BrakeTreasurer
APPLICANT STEVEN DWAYNE GILBERT APPLICATION NO. WR-17.545-21 APPLICATION FOR 11.07 WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
ACTION TAKEN 

### DISMISSED, SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION. Tex. CodeCrim. Proc. Art. 11.07, § 4(a)- (c). 

# 1 1 03fori1<T JUDGE DATE
EXHIBIT 32.1







CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:





I, Kyle Kennedy, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Seafarer Exploration Corp. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”):





(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 operations of the Company.





Dated April 13, 2011.





/s/ Kyle KennedyKyle KennedyChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer and acting Principal Accounting 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 Nanosphere, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1)  for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Farzana M. Moinuddin, Acting Principal 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, as amended; 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/ Farzana M. MoinuddinFarzana M. MoinuddinChief Accounting Officer and Acting Principal Financial Officer


April 8, 2016


This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.


A signed original of this written statement required by §906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Case 2:11-cr-00164-KSH Document 7 Filed 03/23/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 16
Case 2:11-cr-00164-KSH Document 7 Filed 03/23/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 17
Case 2:11-cr-00164-KSH Document 7 Filed 03/23/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 18
**Exhibit 10.03**
**Description of RetentionArrangements with Jill S. Braff, Alessandro Galvagni and Eric R. Ludwig**
On July 6,2009, our board of directors approved retention arrangements for Jill S. Braff,our former Senior Vice President of Global Publishing, Alessandro Galvagni, ourSenior Vice President of Global Product Development and Chief TechnologyOfficer, and Eric R. Ludwig, our Senior Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer. Pursuant to the retention arrangements, in the event that theemployment with Glu of Ms. Braff, Mr. Galvagni or Mr. Ludwig isterminated by us without Cause or as the result of an Involuntary Termination(such terms as defined in those certain Change of Control Severance Agreements,each dated as of October 10, 2008, by and between each of Ms. Braff,Mr. Galvagni and Mr. Ludwig and us (the “Executive COCAgreements”)) prior to June 30, 2010, the terminated executive wouldreceive an amount equal to six months of his or her annualized base salary plus50% of what his or her bonus would have been for the year in which he or she isterminated once such bonus amount is determined subsequent to the end of suchyear. With respect to the bonus payment described in the preceding sentence, inthe event such termination occurs after December 31, 2009 but prior to ourpayment of bonuses earned for 2009 performance, the terminated executive wouldreceive his or her full 2009 bonus plus 50% of what his or her bonus would havebeen for 2010 once such bonus amount is determined.
In the event thatGlu is subject to a Change of Control (as defined in the Executive COCAgreements) prior to June 30, 2010, each of Ms. Braff, Mr. Galvagniand Mr. Ludwig will be entitled to the severance benefits set forth in hisor her Executive COC Agreement rather than the payments described in thepreceding paragraph.
Our Board alsogranted each of Ms. Braff, Mr. Galvagni and Mr. Ludwig an optionto purchase 60,000 shares of our common stock, with 50% of the shares subjectto the option vesting on the date that a new Chief Executive Officer joins Glu(the “Start Date”) and the remaining 50% of the underlying sharesvesting on the six-month anniversary of the Start Date.
Ms. Braffvoluntarily terminated her employment with Glu, effective as of October 9,2009 and prior to the Start Date, and, as a result, is not eligible to receivethe cash awards described above, and her option did not vest and was terminated.
# Table 1500. cucomp
PAUL J. FISHMAN
United States Attorney
LEAH A. BYNON
Assistant U.S. Attorney
970 Broad Street, Suite 700
Newark, NJ 07102

(973) 645-2736

LAB0321

(FLU:KCPB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Hon. Jose L. Linares

Plaintiff, Criminal No. 11-160
v.

ORDER
EUGENE DEGIDIO,

Defendant,
and
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA/CHASE BANK.

USA, NA,
and its successors or assigns,

Garnishee.

This matter having been opened to the Court by the U.S. Attorney, PAUL J. FISHMAN

for the District of New Jersey, on behalf of plaintiff United States of America, and for good cause

shown,

Itisonthis day of Decembeys2011

ORDERED that the Application and Order for Writ of Garnishment in this matter is

hereby WITHDRAWN.

HONZIOSE L. LINARES
Judge, U.S. District Court
“
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 quarterly report of WaterPure International, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Paul S. Lipschutz, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 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 and 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.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
WaterPure International, Inc. and will be retained by WaterPure International,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.





Date:  November
      19, 2008
            By:/s/ PAUL S.
      LIPSCHUTZPaul
      S. LipschutzPrincipal
      Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.01

CERTIFICATIONS

(Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

The undersigned hereby
certifies that (i) the foregoing Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed by Bank of the Carolinas Corporation (the Registrant) for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, 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 that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



|                        |  |  |  |                                                  
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 15, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ Stephen R. Talbert                           
|                        |  |  |  | Stephen R. Talbert                               
|                        |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer            
|                        |  | 
|Date: November 15, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ Eric E. Rhodes                               
|                        |  |  |  | Eric E. Rhodes                                   
|                        |  |  |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



32
Exhibit 10.20

 

Amendment #2 to the

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation 401(k)

Savings and Investment Plan

(September 1, 2010)

 

The Edwards Lifesciences Corporation 401(k) Savings and Investment Plan (“Plan”) is amended as of September 1, 2011, unless specified otherwise:

 

1.               Section 2.16 is amended by the addition of subsection (f) which reads as follows:

 

“(e)  individuals employed by an Employer whose entire amount of non-imputed U.S. source income is  paid to a U.S.  taxing authority. “

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, a duly authorized officer of the Company has caused this Plan to be executed on the 13th day of September, 2011.

 

 

	
 
    	
EDWARDS   LIFESCIENCES
    
	
 
    	
CORPORATION
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/   Christine McCauley
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-82,925-01

EX P ARTE JERRY WAYNE DUK ES, Ap plicant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 1136610-A IN THE 184TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM HARRIS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1 9 6 7 ). Applicant was convicted of possession of
coca ine and se ntence d to eig ht months’ incarc era tion. On Fe bruar

y 10, 2015, the trial court made finding s of fac t and conclusions of law that wer e based on laboratory results purportedly showing that Applicant possessed no controlled substances. The trial court rec ommended that relief be g rante d. Howeve r, the habea s rec ord contains o n l y an unsigne d letter de scribingthe re sults of the laborator y testing. The trial c ourt shall supplement the re cord w ith the laboratory repor t showing the analy sis2

of the evidenc e from Applicant’s case . I f no such repor t i s av ai l ab l e, the trial court shall make finding s of fac t addre ssing the absenc e of this ev i d en ce and assessing the cre dibilit y of the letter included in the habeas record as Ex hibit 4. The trial court shall also make any other supplementa l finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law that it dee ms releva nt and appr opriate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s c laims for habe as cor pus relief
. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has supplemented the rec ord and resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this order
. A supplemental transcript containing all aff idavits and interrog atories or the tra n s c rip ti on of the court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental finding s of fac t and conclusions of law, shall be forwa rded to this Court within 120 day s of the date of this order
. Any extensions of ti me shall be obtaine d from this Court.
Filed: Apr il 22, 2015 Do not publish
Case 2:11-cv-01701-ES-JAD Document 1 Filed 03/24/11 Page 1 of 5 PageID: 1
Case 2:11-cv-01701-ES-JAD Document 1 Filed 03/24/11 Page 2 of 5 PageID: 2
Case 2:11-cv-01701-ES-JAD Document 1 Filed 03/24/11 Page 3 of 5 PageID: 3
Case 2:11-cv-01701-ES-JAD Document 1 Filed 03/24/11 Page 4 of 5 PageID: 4
Case 2:11-cv-01701-ES-JAD Document 1 Filed 03/24/11 Page 5 of 5 PageID: 5
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4987 

To provide for priority funding of water, waste disposal, and wastewater 

facility loans and grants and community facilities loans and grants for 

the communities in Burlington and Camden counties in New Jersey, 

affected by the flood which occurred on July 12, 2004. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 22, 2004 

Mr. SAXTON (for himself, Mr. LOBIONDO, and Mr. ANDREWS) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide for priority funding of water, waste disposal, 

and wastewater facility loans and grants and community 

facilities loans and grants for the communities in Burlington and Camden counties in New Jersey, affected 

by the flood which occurred on July 12, 2004. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4987 IH 

1 SECTION 1. PRIORITY FUNDING OF WATER, WASTE DIS2 POSAL, AND WASTEWATER FACILITY LOANS 

3 AND GRANTS AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES 

4 LOANS AND GRANTS FOR THE COMMUNITIES 

5 IN BURLINGTON AND CAMDEN COUNTIES IN 

6 NEW JERSEY, AFFECTED BY THE FLOOD 

7 WHICH OCCURRED ON JULY 12, 2004. 

8 (a) CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS.—In consid9 ering an application for a loan or grant under paragraph 

10 (1), (2) or (19) of section 306(a) of the Consolidated 

11 Farm and Rural Development Act for a project involving 

12 a water, waste disposal, or wastewater facility or an essen13 tial community facility, from an entity located in a com14 munity in Burlington or Camden county, New Jersey, that 

15 has been affected by a major disaster designated by the 

16 President under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

17 and Emergency Assistance Act that occurred on July 12, 

18 2004— 

19 (1) the project is deemed to be in a rural area; 

20 and 

21 (2) if the project is for a water system, the Sec22 retary of Agriculture is deemed to have determined 

23 that the project meets the requirements of para24 graph (9) of such section. 

25 (b) GRANT RATES.—If the Secretary of Agriculture 

26 approves an application referred to in paragraph (1) of 
3 

•HR 4987 IH 

1 this subsection for a grant, the amount of the grant shall 

2 be— 

3 (1) in the case of a grant under section 

4 306(a)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural De5 velopment Act, 75 percent of the development cost 

6 of the project involved; or 

7 (2) in the case of a grant under section 

8 306(a)(19) of such Act, not less than 35 percent of 

9 the cost of developing the facility involved. 

Æ
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 24, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41133 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus PARMENO BERNAL-FLORES, also known as Jaime Gutierrez-Penaloza, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:03-CR-294-ALL

-------------------- Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Parmeno Bernal-Flores has requested leave to withdraw from this appeal and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Bernal-Flores has received a copy of counsel’s motion and brief but has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw isNo. 04-41133 -2- GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.