alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE
30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>   0000827086
<NAME>  CARLYLE INCOME PLUS, L.P. - II

       
                              
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>           DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                JUN-30-1997

<CASH>                              3,758,309
<SECURITIES>                                0 
<RECEIVABLES>                          18,148
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    3,776,457
<PP&E>                                      0
<DEPRECIATION>                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     28,538,993
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  34,866
<BONDS>                                     0
<COMMON>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                         28,460,287
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       28,538,993
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       97,678
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      135,362
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      (37,684)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 1,150,343
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                        1,150,343
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           17.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                           17.06
                                             <PAGE>

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE
                  OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING
                              FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

      I, Steven A. Schumm, the Chief Administrative Officer of Enstar
Income/Growth Program Five-A, L.P. (the "Partnership") in compliance with 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the period ended December 31, 2002 (the "Report") filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission:

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

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

                                              /s/  Steven A. Schumm
                                              ---------------------
                                              Steven A. Schumm
                                              Chief Administrative Officer
                                              April 17, 2003
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00576

- CR

Cynthia AMBROSE

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR10002

Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE MARTINEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, appellant’s Motion to Withdraw

Appeal is GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED.

SIGNED November 6, 2013.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
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 Quarterly Report of Interlink Electronics, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles C. Best, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(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/ Charles C. Best    
|Charles C. Best        
|Chief Financial Officer

May 15, 2008
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title
18, United States Code)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of UniTek Global Services,
Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that, to his knowledge:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June
30, 2012 (the “Periodic Report”) of the Company 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 the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: August 8, 2012 | By: | /s/ Rocco Romanella                  
|-------------------- | --- | -------------------------------------
|                     |     | Rocco Romanella                      
|                     |     | Chief Executive Officer              
|                     |     | (Principal Executive Officer)        
|                     |     |                                      
|Date: August 8, 2012 | By: | /s/ Ronald J. Lejman                 
|                     |     | Ronald J. Lejman                     
|                     |     | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|                     |     | (Principal Financial Officer)        



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of the Periodic Report or as a separate disclosure
document.



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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-8060

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

REYNALDO S. LUNA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District Judge.

(1:01-cr-00359-MJG-1; 1:06-cv-02912-MJG)

Submitted: May 31, 2007 Decided: June 5, 2007

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Reynaldo S. Luna, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa M. Griffin, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Reynaldo S. Luna seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as successive.

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Luna has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
#### In re Shawn BURTON, Movant.

No. 15-60772.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 21, 2016.

Shawn Burton, Holly Springs, MS, pro se.

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Shawn Burton, Mississippi prisoner # 82975, has filed a request for a certificate of appealability (COA), which we construe as a notice of appeal from the district court’s order transferring Burton’s second 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas application to this court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, and as a motion seeking authorization to file a successive § 2254 application.

The district court transferred Burton’s § 2254 application challenging his robbery conviction to this court for a determination whether a successive application should be allowed. Burton has not met the requirements for filing a successive § 2254 application. Nee 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).

Accordingly, leave to file a successive application is DENIED, and the transfer order is AFFIRMED. Burton’s motion for a COA is DENIED as unnecessary. *See United States v. Fulton,*780 F.3d 683, 688 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 136 S.Ct. 431, 193 L.Ed.2d 335 (2015).

*

 "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.
#### Murray R. BOWDAN, Appellant, v. Hilda L. BOWDAN, Appellee.

No. 13559.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued May 22, 1957.

Decided May 29, 1957.

Mr. Robert T. Smith, Washington, D. C. , for appellant.

Mr. Jean M. Boardman, Washington, D. C., submitted on the brief for ap-pellee.

Before WILBUR K. MILLER, BASTIAN and BURGER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In this ease, plaintiff (appellee) filed s,ait for an absolute divorce on the ground of desertion, and for other relief. After an extensive trial, the court granted the divorce, and fixed the property rights of the parties.

We find no error.

Affirmed.
exv10w2



 






EXHIBIT 10.2




American Medical Systems Holdings, Inc.

Non-employee Director Compensation Summary



In July 2006, the Board of Directors of American Medical Systems Holdings, Inc. approved the
following revised compensation schedule for independent directors:




Annual Retainer



We pay our independent directors an annual retainer for serving on the Board and Committees as
follows:




	 	 	 	 	 
	Board member
	 	$	40,000	 
	Audit Committee chair
	 	$	20,000	 
	Audit Committee member
	 	$	10,000	 
	Compensation Committee chair
	 	$	10,000	 
	Compensation Committee member
	 	$	5,000	 
	Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee chair
	 	$	7,500	 
	Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee member
	 	$	2,500	 






Stock Options



Our current compensation program also provides for the grant of stock options to our independent
directors. On each of May 4, 2006 and July 26, 2006, we granted each of our then-current,
independent directors an option to purchase 10,000 shares of our common stock. Subsequently on
August 4, 2006, we appointed two new independent directors, Robert McLellan, M.D. and D. Verne
Sharma, and granted each of Dr. McLellan and Mr. Sharma an option to purchase 40,000 shares of our
common stock.



For future fiscal years, each independent director who is reelected as a director at the annual
meeting of stockholders or continues to serve as a director after such meeting will be granted an
option to purchase a number of shares of our common stock, as determined by the Board each year
prior to the annual meeting for such year. The Board anticipates that value (based on customary
valuation methods) of future option grants will be approximately equal to the value of the options
to purchase a total of 20,000 shares granted to independent directors in 2006. The options have an
exercise price equal to the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant. The options vest
over a three-year period from the date of grant, as long as the non-employee director continues to
serve on the board, and become immediately exercisable in full upon a change in control. The
options expire seven years from the date of grant.




Expenses



In addition, we reimburse our non-employee directors for reasonable travel, food, lodging and other
incidental expenses incurred in connection with attending meetings of the Board or Committees.
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m., Tuesday, October 10, 2023

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511, 1331 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 504 North, Washington, DC 

20004 (enter from F Street entrance)

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open 

session: Thomas v. CalPortland Co., Docket Nos. WEST 2018-

0402-DM and WEST 2019-0205. (Issues include whether the Judge 

erred in ruling that the miner had established that the operator had 

discriminated against him under section 105(c)(3) of the Mine Act.)

Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility 

features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, 

must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 

29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

Relay / 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

PHONE NUMBER

FOR LISTENING TO 

MEETING: 1-(866) 236-7472

Passcode: 678-100

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b

Dated: September 22, 2023

__________________________________

Sarah L. Stewart

Deputy General Counsel

Billing Code 6735-01
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 6 -00 761 -CR

Ro be r to Al onz o J r . , A ppe lla nt

v . The State of Texas, App ellee

FR OM T HE C OU N T Y C OU R T A T L A W N O. 2 OF WI L L IA MS ON C OU N T Y NO. 05- 7936 -2 , HO NORAB LE TIM OTH Y L. WRIGHT , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E MO R

A N D UM O P I N I O N
Roberto Alonzo J r. plea ded no conte st to driving while intox icated afte r his pretria l motion to s uppress wa s overr uled. T here was a

plea ba rg ain, which wa s followed. The plea documents in the cle rk’s re cord c ontain a waiver of appea l signe d by Alonzo with this handwritten addition: “ This is a plea-ba rg ain ca se. I

waive only

those matters not ra ised by written motion and those matters not ra ised in the pretr ial hearing.”

The trial court has cer

tified that this “is a plea- barg ain ca se, and the defe ndant has NO rig ht of appe al” a

nd also that “the de fenda nt has waived t h e ri gh tof appe al except for pr etrial iss ue s. ” Th e fi rs t st ate me nt i s in c or re c t. Th e se c on d, wh ile no t in c or re c t un de r t

he c ir c ums tanc e s, is an awkw ard w ay

of say ing that Alonzo has the ri gh tto appea l matters ra ised by written motion filed and r

uled on bef

ore tria l. See Tex. R. App. P
. 25.2(a) (2)( A). Usingthe form pr omulgated by the cour t of criminal appe als, the cour t should have ce rtified that t h i s i s a plea- barg ain ca se, but2

matters we re r aised by written motion filed and rule d on befor e trial a nd not withdrawn or w aived, and the defe ndant has the right of appe al. See c e rt if ic atio n fo rm in no te s fo llo wi ngTe x. R. A pp . P. 25.2 (West 2003).

The a ppeal is abated for the trial court to pre pare and file a n amende d cer

tification of the right o f appeal. Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(f) . A supplemental c lerk’s r ecor d containingthe amende d cer

tification shall be tende red f or filingno later tha

n Dec ember

28, 2006.

_______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ W. Kenneth L aw, Chief Justice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Puryear and Pember

ton Filed: De cembe r 14, 2006 Do No t Pu

bli sh
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-                   Change in the Phone Number for Listening to Open Meetings              

#   Change in the Phone Number for Listening to Open Meetings

The telephone number has been changed to 1-(866)236-7472.

Passcode - 678100

 

2019-22582.pdf

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: (202)434-9900TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION 

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW
 

SUITE 9500
 

WASHINGTON, DC 20001
 

May 11, 2006 

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, May 25, 2006 

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, 9th Floor, 601 New Jersey 

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open 

session: Secretary of Labor v. Cumberland Coal Resources, LP, 

Docket Nos. PENN 2004-73-R, PENN 2004-74-R, PENN 

2004-75-R, PENN 2004-85-R, PENN 2004-86-R, PENN 2004-87-R, 

PENN 2004-88-R, PENN 2004-104-R, PENN 2004-105-R, PENN 

2004-181, and PENN 2005-8. (Issues include whether substantial 

evidence supports the judge’s findings that Cumberland violated 30 

C.F.R. § 75.334(b)(1) on three occasions because its bleeder system 

failed to effectively dilute and carry away methane; whether 

substantial evidence supports the judge’s finding that Cumberland 

had notice that its bleeder system violated 30 C.F.R. § 75.334(b)(1); 

and whether the judge correctly found that MSHA acted within its 

discretion in issuing imminent danger withdrawal orders on two 

occasions). 

The Commission heard oral argument in this matter on May 11, 2006. 

Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility 

features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must 

inform the Commission in advance of those needs, subject to 29 

C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d). 

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Jean Ellen (202) 434-9950 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay / 

1-800-877-8339 for toll free.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.8.3

                                AMENDMENT OF THE

                        PULITZER RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN

        Pursuant to a resolution adopted on July 31, 1996 by the Board of
Directors of Pulitzer Publishing Company, the Pulitzer Retirement Savings Plan
is hereby amended, effective July 31, 1996, by adding the following to the end
of Article III:

                "3.07. Rollover Contributions. Subject to such rules as may be
established by the Administrative Committee, an Employee may make a rollover
contribution to the Trust of (a) part or all of a distribution received from
another employee benefit trust described in Section 401(a) of the Code and
exempt from tax under Section 501(a) of the Code, (b) part or all of a
distribution received from a qualified employee annuity plan described in
Section 403(a)(1) of the Code which meets the requirements of Section 404(a)(2)
of the Code, or (c) the entire amount received (including money and any other
property) from an individual retirement account.  Any rollover contribution
must meet the income deferral requirements of Section 402(a)(5), Section
403(a)(4) or Section 408(d)(3) of the Code, as the case may be (including the
requirement that the rollover contribution be made no later than 60 days after
the day on which the Employee received the payment or distribution from
the other plan or account).  The Administrative Committee and/or the Trustee may
require an Employee to furnish any relevant information or documentation and to
make any reasonable representations concerning the distribution from the prior
plan or account before deciding whether to accept a rollover contribution.  The
amount of a rollover contribution shall be credited to the Employee's Account
and shall equal the sum of the cash plus the fair market value of the property
transferred (subject to the right of the Administrative Committee 
<PAGE>   2
or the Trustee to refuse to accept property), determined as of the date the
property is received by the Trustee.  For purposes of this section, rollover
contributions shall also include direct rollovers as described in Section
401(a)(31) of the Code."



July 31, 1996                              /s/ Ronald H. Ridgway
-------------                              -------------------------
Date                                       Ronald H. Ridgway
                                           Senior Vice President - Finance