alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Dismiss Writ and Opinion Filed June 12, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05-13-00698-CV IN RE CHRISTOPHER ARIC RADKE, Relator Original Proceeding from the 195th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F96-02380-UN
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Moseley, Francis, and Fillmore Opinion by Justice Francis Relator contends the trial court failed to rule on his motion for DNA testing. The facts
and issues are well known to the parties, so we need not recount them herein. The relief requested by relator has been gran ted. Therefore, the issues pres ented in this petition are moot.
See Dow Chem. Co. v. Garcia , 909 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we DISMISS relator = s petition for a writ of mandamus.

130698F.P05 /Molly Francis/ MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM














The Board of Directors and Stockholders


Cecil Bancorp, Inc.


Elkton, Maryland








We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference into the Registration Statements on Numbers 333-35120 on Form S-3 and 333-159419, 333-153227 and 33-81374 on Forms S-8 of Cecil Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiaries (Cecil Bancorp) of our report dated February 14, 2011, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Cecil Bancorp as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the years then ended, which report is included in the December 31, 2010 annual report on Form 10-K of Cecil Bancorp.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of George A. Hall, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[987 NYS2d 716]

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 9, 2012, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant began employment as a teacher in 2002. He was informed at that time that he was required to obtain a Master’s degree within the first five years of employment in order to maintain a valid teaching certificate. Despite being granted two extensions to the time limit, claimant failed to obtain the degree and his employment was terminated in June 2011 for a lack of a teaching certificate. Inasmuch as claimant failed to timely obtain the proper certification, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision that claimant voluntarily left his *1237employment without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and will not be disturbed *(see Matter of Rhome [New York City Bd. of*Educ.—Commissioner *of Labor],*50 AD3d 1422, 1422 [2008]; *Matter of Toussaint [Commissioner of Labor],*17 AD3d 761, 762 [2005]). Moreover, the Administrative Law Judge did not err in denying, as irrelevant, claimant’s requested testimony regarding his subsequent attempts for new employment with the employer *(see*12 NYCRR 461.4 [c], [d]; *Matter of Wedgle [Commissioner of Labor],*99 AD3d 1139, 1140 [2012]; *Matter of Gramonte [Inor Dental, P.C*.—Commissioner *of Labor],*46 AD3d 997, 998 [2007]).

Lahtinen, J.E, McCarthy, Garry, Rose and Devine, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
          UNAUDITED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT 3/31/98
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001016275
<NAME>                        GEO PETROLEUM, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         177,410
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  250,144
<ALLOWANCES>                                   308,179
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               427,554
<PP&E>                                       6,588,433
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,227,302)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,096,865
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,663,271
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,049,399
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,615,806)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,096,865
<SALES>                                        203,224
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               216,844
<CGS>                                          172,752
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  114,447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,267
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (96,622)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (96,622)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Union Financial Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as added by 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 results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered
by the Report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Dwight V. NeeseDwight V. NeesePresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Richard H. FlakeRichard H. FlakeChief Financial Officer




Date:    December 16, 2003
Exhibit 4.2


Letter Agreement








 


Tasman Metals Ltd.

1305, 1090 West Georgia Street

 Vancouver, BC  V6E 3V7  Canada


Tel: 604.685.9316 ● Fax: 604.683.1585




 





































September 8, 2014







Sierra Peru Pty Ltd.


33 Homebush Drive


Junortoun, Victoria  3551


Australia







Attention:  Mr. Mark Saxon, Principal







Dear Sirs:








	Re:	Management Agreement dated as at October 1, 2010 between Tasman Metals Ltd. (the "Corporation") and Sierra Peru Pty Ltd. (the "Contractor")










Reference is made to the above-noted Management Agreement (the "Agreement") under which Mr. Mark Saxon ("Saxon") serves as the Corporation's President and Chief Executive Officer.







This letter serves as confirmation that the Corporation's Board of Directors has approved an increase in the Contractor's remuneration as a result of a review of competiveness of the compensation paid to Presidents and Chief Executive Officers of comparable companies.







Effective August 1, 2014, the annual remuneration paid to the Contractor in exchange for Saxon's services has been increased from $162,000 ($13,500 per month) to $180,000 ($15,000 per month).   In that regard, Section 4(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended and replaced with the following:







1.            "During the term of this Agreement, the Contractor will be paid a monthly fee of $15,000, payable monthly as directed by Saxon from time to time and such fee to be reviewed by the Corporation from time to time"


 


We confirm that all other terms of the Agreement remain the same.







If the foregoing is in agreement with our discussions, please acknowledge same by executing this letter where applicable.







Thank you.







Yours truly,







	
TASMAN METALS LTD.


 

	
SIERRA PERU PTY LTD.


	
 


Per: /s/ Nick DeMare_________________________________


      Nick DeMare, CFO

	
 


Per: /s/ Mark Saxon_________________________________


      Mark Saxon, Principal
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Bailey, Appellant.

[860 NYS2d 509]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth Pickholz, J.), entered on or about May 31, 2006, which adjudicated defendant a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The People met their burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, risk factors bearing a sufficient total point score to support a level three adjudication. Rehable information including grand jury testimony, defendant’s criminal history and admissions made by defendant, along with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, supported each of the risk factors at issue *(see*Correction Law § 168-n [3]; *People v Dort,*18 AD3d 23, 25 [2005], *lv denied*4 NY3d 885 [2005]; *People v Roland,*292 AD2d 271 [2002], *lv denied*98 NY2d 614 [2002]), and we have considered and rejected defendant’s arguments as to each factor. We also reject defendant’s challenges to the choice of risk factors made by the Legislature and the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders *(see People v Bligen,*33 AD3d 489 [2006]; *People v Joe,*26 AD3d 300 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 703 [2006]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P, Catterson, Moskowitz and Acosta, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 23****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We have issued our reports dated March 15, 2007 accompanying the consolidated financialstatements and Schedule II and management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting included in the annual report of A.S.V., Inc. and subsidiaries on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference ofsaid reports in the Registration Statements of A.S.V., Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-43075, FileNo. 333-64291 and File No. 333-127739) and Form S-3 and amendments (File No. 333-120062)./s/ Grant Thornton LLPMinneapolis, Minnesota
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2907 

To amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to ensure 

that recipients of assistance under the Troubled Asset Relief Program 

repay such assistance only if they would remain well capitalized after 

such repayment. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 16, 2009 

Mr. TIAHRT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 

2008 to ensure that recipients of assistance under the 

Troubled Asset Relief Program repay such assistance 

only if they would remain well capitalized after such 

repayment. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PURPOSE. 

4 The purpose of this Act is to authorize and remove 

5 impediments to the repayment of funds received under the 

6 Troubled Asset Relief Program. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2907 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPAYMENT OF TARP FUNDS. 

2 Section 111(g) of the Emergency Economic Stabiliza3 tion Act of 2008 (12 U.S.C. 5221(g)) is amended— 

4 (1) by inserting ‘‘if, subsequent to such repay5 ment, the TARP recipient is well capitalized (as de6 termined by the appropriate Federal banking agency 

7 having supervisory authority over the TARP recipi8 ent)’’ after ‘‘waiting period,’’; and 

9 (2) by striking ‘‘, and when such assistance is 

10 repaid, the Secretary shall liquidate warrants associ11 ated with such assistance at the current market 

12 price’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Allied
      Security Innovations, Inc.


**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 Allied Security Innovations, Inc. (the
        "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with
        the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
        Michael
        Pellegrino, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to
        18
        U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
        of
        2002, that:
  (1)
        The
        Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company 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.
  A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        Allied Security Innovations, Inc. and will be retained by Allied Security
        Innovations, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
        or its
        staff upon request.
 Date: April 14, 2008/s/
                      Michael PellegrinoMichael
                      Pellegrino
**EXHIBIT 31.3**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Melvyn Brunt, Chief Financial Officer of LQ Corporation, Inc., hereby certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of LQ Corporation, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof 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 financialinformation 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(s) and I are responsiblefor 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 underour 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 theregistrant’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

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’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 isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

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

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting. 

 

Dated: May 14, 2004
PATRICE KERR,

Appellant,

v.

JULIE L. JONES, Secretary, 

Department of Corrections,

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. 1D13-2325

_____________________________/

Opinion filed January 16, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Taylor County.

Gregory S. Parker, Judge.

Patrice Kerr, pro se, Appellant.

Beverly Brewster, Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, MAKAR, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.
<PAGE>
 
Exhibit 11.1

               Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc. and Subsidiaries
                         Computation of Per Share Loss
                For the Thirteen Week Period Ended May 3, 1997
                   (In Thousands, Except Per Share Amounts)

Weighted average number of issued shares outstanding              7,650

Effect of:
     1996 Stock Option Plan                                          92
     Melville Warrant to purchase common stock                    1,260 
                                                                -------

Weighted average shares outstanding                               9,002 
                                                                =======

Net loss                                                        $(7,263)
                                                                =======

Net loss per common share                                       $  (.81)
                                                                =======
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

I, Steven E. West, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q ofSunterra Corporation; 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, 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 quarterly report is beingprepared; 

 

b. evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusion 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

 

c. disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and 

 

5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control of financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors:

 

a. all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control of financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 10626 Summary Calendar

DENNIS BOYLE , Petitioner

- Appellant

v.
WARDEN WILSON , Respondent

- Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:19

- CV

- 327

Before JOLLY, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Dennis Boyle, federal prisoner # 75596

- 097, appeals the dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging the constitutionality of certain Bureau of Prisons program statements that restrict his ability to use the prison’s electronic messaging system. The district court held that Boyle’s challenge was to the conditions of his confinement and, as such, it was not cognizable on § 2241 review. We review de novo the district

* 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 August 4, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-10626 Document: 00515514983 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/04/202019

- 10626

2 court’s dismissal of the § 2241 petition on the pleadings. See Pack v. Yusuff , 218 F .3d 448, 451 (5th Cir. 2000).
A § 2241 habeas petition is the proper procedural vehicle for challenging
an action that “ directly implicates the duration of ” a prisoner’s confinement.
Davis v. Fechtel , 150 F.3d 486, 487, 490 (5th Cir. 1998)

. I t is not , however, the proper procedural vehicle for claims , such as Boyle’s, regarding the conditions of confinement. See i d . at 490; Carson v. Johnson , 112 F.3d 818, 820

- 21 (5th Cir. 1997)

. Boyle therefore has shown no error on the part of the district court. S ee Pack , 218 F.3d at 451

. AFFIRMED. Case: 19-10626 Document: 00515514983 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/04/2020
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 Asia Premium Television Group, Inc. a
Nevada  corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ending
March  31,  2004,  as  filed  with  the  Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"),  I, Stanley R. Goss, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant  to  Section  906  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350),  that  to  my  knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934  (15  U.S.C.  78m  or  78o(d));  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/  Stanley  R.  Goss
                                  --------------------------
                                  Stanley  R.  Goss
                                  Chief  Financial  Officer
Date:  August  11,  2004