alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mikato FULKS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-2161.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan, 15, 2016.

Filed: Jan. 21, 2016.

David A. Harris, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Aaron L. Jennen, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Western District of Arkansas, Fort Smith, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jose Alfaro, Assistant Federal Public Defender Federal Public Defender’s Office Fayetteville, AR, for Defendant-Appellant.

Mikato Fulks, Dermott, AR, pro se.

Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

[Unpublished]

PER CURIAM.

Mikato Fulks directly appeals after he pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to a felon-in-possession offense, and the district court1 sentenced him within the Guidelines range to 70 months in prison and three years of supervised release. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and in a brief filed under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), he challenges the substantive reasonableness of Fulks’s sentence. In a pro se supplemental brief, Fulks argues that defense counsel railroaded him, with failed promises of sentencing leniency, into accepting a guilty plea on an unjustly brought charge.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to vary below the Guidelines range, and that the resulting sentence is not substantively unreasonable. *See United States v. Feemster,*572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc) (standard of review); *United States v. Jordan,*573 F.3d 586, 590 (8th Cir.2009). As to the pro se arguments, we decline to review any ineffective-assistance claims in this direct criminal appeal, *see United States v. Looking Cloud,*419 F.3d 781, 788-89 (8th Cir.2005); and to the extent Fulks suggests that his guilty plea was involuntary, this newly raised contention is not properly before us, *see United States v. Murphy,*899 F.2d 714, 716 (8th Cir.1990). Finally, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

Accordingly, we affirm. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

1

. The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

Postal Service.

# ACTION:

Extension of comment period.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Postal Service published a notice with request for public comment in the                         **Federal Register**                         (66 FR 51480-51481) on October 9, 2001. The document on which comments are requested is available on the Postal Service's public Web site at                         *www.usps.com/​strategicdirection*                         or at                         *www.usps.com*                         keyword: transformation. Comments were due November 1, 2001. The comment period is hereby extended until January 31, 2002.                    

# DATES:

The Postal Service must receive your comments on or before January 31, 2002. No additional extensions on the comment period will be granted.

# ADDRESSES:

                        Those responding are encouraged to e-mail their comments to                         *transformation@email.usps.gov.*                         Those wishing to send written comments should mail them to Julie S. Moore, Executive Program Director, Office of Transformation, Strategic Planning, Room 4011, United States Postal Service Headquarters, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20260-1520.                    

      ( print page 65233)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Paul Van Coverden (202) 268-8130.

Stanley F. Mires,

Chief Counsel, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 01-31167 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mario Alberto JAUREGUI-BALDERRAMA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-10799

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 9, 2008.

Mark L. Nichols, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Federal Public Defender’s Office Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, Defendant-Appellant.

Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Mario Alberto Jauregui-Balderrama (Jauregui) appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute cocaine. He argues that the district court clearly erred in denying him a two-level adjustment pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 for his self-described minor role in the offense as a courier.

Whether a defendant was a minimal or minor participant is a factual determination that will not be held clearly erroneous unless it is implausible in light of the record as a whole. *United States v. Villa-nueva,*408 F.3d 193, 203 (5th Cir.2005). According to the presentence report, Jau-regui purchased a pick-up truck from his drug supplier, consented to the installation of a hidden compartment in the vehicle, loaned the vehicle to his supplier six to seven times within a year, and was to be paid $4,000 for transporting almost 10 kilograms of cocaine. In light of these facts, the district court did not clearly err in denying him a minor-role adjustment. *See United States v. Miranda,*248 F.3d 434, 446-47 (5th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"Revocations – Aug 9, 2019","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"ouvut50ULF\"><a href=\"\/oti\/revocations-aug-9-2019\/\">Revocations – Aug 9, 2019<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/oti\/revocations-aug-9-2019\/embed\/#?secret=ouvut50ULF\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Revocations – Aug 9, 2019” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"ouvut50ULF\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
Opinion issued May 7, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-23-00952-CV

———————————

ANTOINETTE RAO, Appellant

V.

CROSBY APTS. LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 3

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1215566

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Antoinette Rao has failed to timely file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P.

38.6(a) (governing time to file brief), 38.8(a) (governing failure of appellant to file 

brief). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did 

not adequately respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal 
2

of case).

We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution for failure to timely file a brief. 

We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Farris.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Alvin Curry","title":"Controlled Carrier List - Federal Maritime Commission","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"jK61L4xUWJ\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/databases-and-publications\/controlled-carrier-list\/\">Controlled Carrier List<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/databases-and-publications\/controlled-carrier-list\/embed\/#?secret=jK61L4xUWJ\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Controlled Carrier List” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"jK61L4xUWJ\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"About Ocean common carriers operating in the U.S.\/foreign oceanborne trades that are owned or controlled by governments are listed below. These controlled carriers are subject to rate review standards to ensure that they do not unfairly use their government-supported positions against their competitors. (46 CFR \u00a7565). For questions regarding the controlled carriers, please contact the […]","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/seal_final_sm.jpg","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":293}
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 242 (Monday, December 17, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 65019]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-30974]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Declaration of Disaster #3383]


State of Mississippi

    As a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 
December 7, 2001, I find that Bolivar, DeSoto, Hinds, Humphreys, 
Madison, Panola, Quitman, Sunflower, Tate and Washington Counties in 
the State of Mississippi constitute a disaster area due to damages 
caused by severe storms, tornadoes and flooding that occurred on 
November 24, 2001 and continue. Applications for loans for physical 
damage as a result of this disaster may be filed until the close of 
business on February 5, 2002 and for economic injury until the close of 
business on September 9, 2002 at the address listed below or other 
locally announced locations: U.S. Small Business Administration, 
Disaster Area 2 Office, One Baltimore Place, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 
30308.
    In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small 
businesses located in the following contiguous counties may be filed 
until the specified date at the above location: Attala, Claiborne, 
Coahoma, Copiah, Holmes, Issaquena, Lafayette, Leake, LeFlore, 
Marshall, Rankin, Scott, Sharkey, Simpson, Tallahatchie, Tunica, 
Warren, Yalobusha and Yazoo in the State of Mississippi; Chicot, 
Crittenden, Desha and Phillips counties in the State of Arkansas; East 
Carroll parish in the State of Louisiana; and Shelby county in the 
State of Tennessee.
    The interest rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Homeowners with credit available elsewhere................       6.500
  Homeowners without credit available elsewhere.............       3.250
  Businesses with credit available elsewhere................       8.000
  Businesses and non-profit organizations without credit           4.000
   available elsewhere......................................
  Others (including non-profit organizations) with credit          6.375
   available elsewhere......................................
For Economic Injury:
  Businesses and small agricultural cooperatives without           4.000
   credit available elsewhere...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 338311. 
For economic injury the number is 9N7200 for Mississippi; 9N7300 for 
Arkansas; 9N7400 for Louisiana; and 9N7500 for Tennessee.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 
59008)

    Dated: December 10, 2001.
Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-30974 Filed 12-14-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Reginal Marcellius BOYD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-4508.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 5, 2010.

Decided: Dec. 15, 2010.

Katherine E. Evatt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Columbia, SC, for Appellant. William N. Nettles, United States Attorney, James C. Leventis, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, SC, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Reginal Marcellius Boyd pled guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), (e) (2006). Boyd’s advisory Sentencing Guidelines range of imprisonment was fifty-seven to seventy-one months’ imprisonment. The district court sentenced Boyd to sixty-five months’ imprisonment. Boyd appeals, claiming the court erred by considering certain conduct prior to imposing sentence. He has also filed a pro se supplemental brief claiming there was an error in determining his Criminal History Category. We affirm.

An appellate court reviews a sentence for reasonableness under an abuse of discretion standard. *Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). This review requires consideration of both the procedural and substantive reasonableness of a sentence. *Id.*This court must assess whether the district court properly calculated the advisory guidelines range, considered the § 3553(a) factors, analyzed any arguments presented by the parties, and sufficiently explained the selected sentence. *Id.*at 49-50, 128 S.Ct. 586; *see United States v. Lynn,*592 F.3d 572, 575-76 (4th Cir.2010); *United States v. Carter,*564 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir.2009). If there is no procedural error, the appellate court reviews the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, “exam-in[ing] the totality of the circumstances to see whether the sentencing court abused its discretion in concluding that the sentence it chose satisfied the standards set forth in § 3553(a).” *United States v. Mendoza-Mendoza,*597 F.3d 212, 216 (4th Cir.2010). If the sentence is within the guide*809lines range, the court applies a presumption of reasonableness. *Rita v. United States,*551 U.S. 338, 346-56, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (upholding presumption of reasonableness for within-guidelines sentence).

We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by considering Boyd’s conduct during the commission of the offense in determining the within-guidelines sentence. We further conclude the sentence is reasonable. In addition, while we grant Boyd’s motion for leave to file a pro se supplemental brief, we find his issue is without merit.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.

AFFIRMED.
**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 Score One, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31,
      2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), we,
      Hoi-ho Kiu, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Lai Ming Lau, Chief
      Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





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





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








/s/
        Hoi-ho Kiu
 Hoi-ho
        Kiu
 Chief
        Executive Officer
 September
        14,
        2007








/s/
        Lai Ming Lau
 Lai
        Ming
        Lau
 Chief
        Financial Officer
 September
        14, 2007
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Written Statement of the Chief Executive and Acting Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  1350**

 

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, I, the undersigned Principal Executive Officer  of Legacy Mining, Ltd.(the "Company"),  hereby certify, based on  my  knowledge,  that  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company  for  the  quarter ended March 31, 2008  (the "Report") fully complies  with  the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act  of 1934  and that information contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition  and results of operations of the Company.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Alvin Curry","title":"Commissioner Louis E. Sola - Federal Maritime Commission","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Tc7zqieCMr\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/about\/commissioner-archive\/louis-e-sola\/\">Commissioner Louis E. Sola<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/about\/commissioner-archive\/louis-e-sola\/embed\/#?secret=Tc7zqieCMr\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Commissioner Louis E. Sola” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"Tc7zqieCMr\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Staff Confidential Assistant: Anna D\u2019Aprile Contact Phone: 202-523-5712Email: ADaprile@fmc.gov Biography Commissioner Louis E. Sola was nominated by President Trump on November 15, 2018 to a term expiring on June 30, 2023. The United States Senate confirmed his nomination on January 2, 2019 and he was sworn into office on January 23, 2019. Commissioner Sola was a 2018 candidate [...]","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/SolaOfficial-209x300-1-e1714582201708.jpg"}
Exhibit 14

HemaCare Personnel Policy Manual

Code of Ethics
Section 102

---



---





---









---



CERTIFICATION

I acknowledge that I have received, read, understood, and will comply with HemaCare Corporation's Code of Ethics. I understand and agreed that the Code of Ethics
is not an employment contract between HemaCare Corporation and myself.



|Employee Name (Please Print) |  | Employee Signature
|---------------------------- |  | ------------------
|                             |  |                   
|                             |  | Date              
|                             |  |                   



---

Initiated 10/01/03

© 2003 HemaCare Corporation. All Rights Reserved

---