alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Longevity Medical Supply, Inc., as Assignee of Randal Chacon, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Citiwide Auto Leasing, Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Miller, Leiby &amp; Associates, P.C. (Melissa M. Wolin, Esq.), for appellant.Law Offices of Melissa Betancourt, P.C. (Melissa Betancourt, Esq.), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Steven Z. Mostofsky, J.), entered May 6, 2015. The order denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and granted plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is reversed, with $30 costs, defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted and plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment is denied.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied defendant's motion which had sought summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff's assignor had failed to appear for scheduled independent medical examinations (IMEs), and granted plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.</p><p>In support of its motion, defendant established that, before it had received the claim at issue, it had mailed letters scheduling an initial and follow-up IME (<a href="../2008/2008_04072.htm" target="_blank"><i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co.</i>, 50 AD3d 1123</a> [2008]). Defendant also established that the assignor had failed to appear for the scheduled IMEs (<a href="../2006/2006_09604.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Stephen Fogel Psychological, P.C. v Progressive Cas. Ins. Co.</i>, 35 AD3d 720</a> [2006]). Defendant further demonstrated that, upon receipt of the claim at issue, it had timely mailed initial and follow-up requests for written <font color="FF0000">[*2]</font>verification (<i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond</i>, 50 AD3d 1123). Finally, defendant established that, upon receiving the requested verification, it had timely denied the claim at issue based upon the assignor's failure to appear for IMEs (<i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond</i>, 50 AD3d 1123; <i>Alev Med. Supply, Inc. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.</i>, 38 Misc 3d 143[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 50258[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2013]). Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition.</p><p>Accordingly, the order is reversed, defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted and plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment is denied.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.</p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: December 22, 2017<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Exhibit 99.1


                            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 Wilder Richman Historic Properties
II, L.P. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q, as amended, for the period ending
November 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard Paul Richman, Chief Executive Officer of
Wilder Richman Historic Corporation, general partner of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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/ Richard Paul Richman
---------------------------------------
Richard Paul Richman
Chief Executive Officer of Wilder Richman
Historic Corporation, general partner of the Company
February 5, 2003
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J OS E A. VI L L AN UE VA - Z AL DA NA , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 72840 A ge nc yN o. A 014- 145- 167 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ar c h 8, 2011 ** B efo re: F A R R IS , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J os e A . V i l l anue va - Z a l dana , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of E l S a l va dor , pe t i t i ons f or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l f r o m an im m ig r a tio n ju d g e ’s ( “I J ” ) d e p o rta tio n o r d e ra n dd e n y in g h is m o tio n to re m and b as ed on i neff

ec t i ve as si st ance of coun se l . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 

# FI LED MA R 25 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 72840 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o c la im s o f in e f f e c tiv e a s s is tan c e o f

c o u n s e l, Moh am m ed v. G on zales , 40 0 F . 3d 78 5, 79 1-92 (9th C i r. 20 05 ). W e deny i n p art an dg ran ti n p artth e p et i t i o n fo r rev i ew an drem an dfo r fu rth er p ro ceed i n g s. T he B IA di d n oterr i n fi nd i ng thatV i l l anueva-Z al dana’ s f orm ercoun se l had n o t a c te din e f

f e c tiv e lyb yf

a ilin g to s ub m it th e p le ah e ar in g tr an s c r ip t to th e I J . See id. a t 7 9 3 ( ap e titio n e rm u s t d e m o n s tr a te th a t c o u n s e l f a ile dto p e r f

o rm w ith suff i ci entcom pet ence t o p re vai l on an i neff ec t i ve as si st ance of coun se l cl ai m ). B ec ause the B IA fa i l ed t o add re ss V i l l anueva-Z al dana’ s c on t ent i on s, ra i se d i n hi s br i e f

on appe a l t o the B I A , tha tthe I J ’ s bi a s vi ol a t e d due pr oc e s s a nd tha tthe I Je rr e d i n f

a i l i ng t o a dj udi c a t e hi s a dj us tm e ntof s t a tus appl i c a t i on, w e gr antthe pe t i t i on f orr e vi e w a nd r e m and t o the a ge nc yt o c ons i de rthe s e c ont e nt i ons i n the f ir s t in s tan c e . See B rezi l i en v. H older , 5 6 9 F .3 d4 0 3 , 4 1 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) ( B I A is n o t f r e e to ig n o r e a r g u m e n ts r a is e db yap e titio n e r ) . E a c h p artys h a l l b e ari t s o wn c o s t s i n th i s p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D E N IE D i n p art; G R A N T E D i n p art; R E M A N D E D .
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.11

                             EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     THIS AGREEMENT dated as of December 19, 1997, between NATIONAL TECHTEAM,
INC., a Delaware corporation, whose address is 835 Mason Avenue, Dearborn,
Michigan 48124 (the "Company"), and HARRY A. LEWIS ("Executive"), an
individual residing at 3453 Slatterly Road, Attica, Michigan 48412.

                                 WITNESSETH:

     1.   EMPLOYMENT AND DUTIES. The Company hereby employs and the Executive
hereby agrees to serve the Company as its President and Chief Operating Officer
for the period hereinafter defined. Executive agrees to perform such services
as shall from time to time be assigned to him by the Company's Chief Executive
Officer ("CEO") and its Board of Directors and, in the absence of such
assignment, such services as are reasonably necessary to the successful
operation of the Company and any subsidiaries that it may from time to time
own. In the performance of his duties, Executive shall report to and be under
the direction of the CEO and the Board of Directors. Executive agrees to devote
substantially all his time and attention during the Company's normal working
hours and his best efforts and ability to the affairs of the Company and any
such subsidiaries and shall not engage in other activities which interfere with
the proper discharge of his duties or which compete with the interests of the
Company, provided that Executive may devote reasonable time to serving as a
director or member of charitable, religious or business organizations so long
as the same do not result in a conflict of interest with the interests of the
Company.

     2.   TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be for one year commencing on
January 2, 1998. It shall be automatically renewed annually for successive one
year periods unless either party provides 30 advance written notice of the
intention not to so renew. Continuance of employment is not required by this
Agreement nor it is a condition to this Agreement.

     3.   COMPENSATION. As compensation for his services hereunder, the Company
shall initially pay Executive an annual salary of $200,000, payable in
appropriate installments to conform with regular payroll dates for salaried
personnel of the Company. Such salary may be increased (but not decreased) by
the Board of Directors at any time.

     4.   STOCK OPTIONS. Subject to approval by the Company's Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors, Executive shall receive options to
purchase up to 100,000 shares of the Company's common stock under the Company's
1990 Nonqualified Stock Option Plan. The exercise price, terms, limitations and
restrictions applicable to such options shall be as set forth in a separate
stock option agreement substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 1,
to be entered into between the parties in the event of the approval thereof by
the Board of Directors.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                           1,412
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,373
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,559
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                60,709
<PP&E>                                           5,994
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,331,997
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 193,522
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,165
<BONDS>                                    124,969,685
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,528
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   193,522
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               121,511
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   77,065
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                40,499
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,542
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,669
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,264)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,003)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,261)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,261)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0.0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.0
        

</TABLE>
Transmittal of Employer’s Annual OMB No. 1545-0714

Information Return of Tip Income and Allocated Tips Form 8027-T

Department of the Treasury

Internal Revenue Service

 For Privacy Act and Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see

the Instructions for Form 8027.

Use IRS label. Make Employer’s name Employer identification number

any necessary changes.

Otherwise, type or print

employer’s name,

address, and employer

identification number as

shown on Form 941.

Number and street (or P.O. box number, if mail is not delivered to street address.) Number of accompanying Forms 8027

City or town, state, and ZIP code

File Form 8027-T along with accompanying Forms

8027 with the Internal Revenue Service Center,

Andover, MA 05501, by February 29, 2000.

Use Form 8027-T to send Forms 8027 to the

Internal Revenue Service Center if you have more

than one establishment for which you have to file

Form 8027.

Cat. No. 61006A Form 8027-T (1999)

Apt. or suite no.

1999
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF E. A. R., A 

CHILD,

 

 Appellant. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00070-CV

Appeal from the

65th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2017DCM5786)

O R D E R

In order to protect the identity of the minor child who is the subject of this appeal, the 

Court has determined on its own motion that it is necessary to identify the child by his initials, E. 

E. R., and the parent by initials as well, in all papers submitted to the Court, including letters, 

motions, and briefs. See Tex.R.App.P. 9..8. The Court will also refer to the child and parent by 

their initials in correspondence, orders, and in its opinion and judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 5

th day of March, 2019.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 18, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41701

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN CARLOS DIAZ-MARQUEZ, 

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:04-CR-1164-ALL

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

Before JOLLY, DAVIS and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Carlos Diaz-Marquez (Diaz) appeals his 58-month

sentence for having entered the United States illegally after

deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). Diaz

contends that his sentence must be vacated and his case remanded

for resentencing because the district court committed reversible

error by sentencing him pursuant to a mandatory Sentencing

Guidelines regime, in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.

220 (2005). 
No. 04-41701

- 2 -

The district court’s sentence pursuant to a mandatory

guideline scheme constitutes Fanfan error. See United States v.

Walters, 418 F.3d 461, 463-64 (5th Cir. 2005). The Government

thus bears the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that

the district court would have imposed the same sentence had

the Guidelines been advisory only. See id. at 464-65. If the

Government cannot show that the error was harmless, we ordinarily

will vacate and remand for resentencing. Id. at 463.

The sentencing transcript does not reveal whether the

district court would have imposed the same sentence had the

Guidelines been advisory. Because the Government cannot meet

its burden, we vacate Diaz’s sentence and remand the case for

resentencing. See id. at 464-66.

Diaz also challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s

treatment of prior felony and aggravated-felony convictions as

sentencing factors rather than as elements of the offense that

must be found by a jury, on authority of Apprendi v. New Jersey,

530 U.S. 466 (2000). Diaz’s constitutional challenge is

foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224,

235 (1998). Although Diaz contends that Almendarez-Torres was

incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court

would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such

arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. 

See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.),
No. 04-41701

- 3 -

cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Diaz properly concedes that

his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and

circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for

further review. Accordingly, Diaz’s conviction is affirmed. 

CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; CASE REMANDED.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2083 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2083

To revive, and extend until January 1, 1999, the suspension of duty on 
                 certain carding and spinning machines.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 11, 1993

 Mr. Machtley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To revive, and extend until January 1, 1999, the suspension of duty on 
                 certain carding and spinning machines.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    Heading 9902.84.45 (relating to certain carding and spinning 
machines specially designed for wool) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States is amended by striking out ``12/31/92'' and 
inserting ``12/31/98''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    (a) In General.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies with 
respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, 
on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Retroactive Application to Termination of Previous 
Suspension.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, upon proper request filed 
with the appropriate customs officer before the 90th day after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or withdrawal from warehouse 
for consumption, of any good described in heading 9902.84.45 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States that was made--
            (1) after December 31, 1992; and
            (2) before the 15th day after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act;
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry or withdrawal 
occurred on the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FISCAL 1997
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,441
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,023,606
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    552,420
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,720,340
<PP&E>                                      18,246,658
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,874,816
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,554,040
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,596,664
<BONDS>                                     12,307,187
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        36,563
<OTHER-SE>                                     613,626
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,554,040
<SALES>                                     20,778,565
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            20,778,565
<CGS>                                       13,475,859
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,475,859
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,605,511
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             531,568
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (760,580)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (760,580)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (760,580)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.21)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                   EXHIBIT 11
                 NANOPIERCE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE
                                   (Unaudited)

                                        Three Months Ended
                                           September 30,
                                     -------------------------

                                         2004         2003
                                     ------------  -----------
<S>                                  <C>           <C>

        Net loss                     $  (206,626)    (454,864)
                                     ============  ===========

        Weighted average number of
          common shares outstanding   90,059,033   62,404,043

        Common equivalent shares
          representing shares
          issuable upon exercise of
          outstanding options and
          warrants                             -            -
                                     ------------  -----------

                                      90,059,033   62,404,043
                                     ============  ===========
        Net loss per share,
         basic and diluted          $         *        (0.01)
                                     ============  ===========
</TABLE>

*    Less than ($0.01) per share.

Stock  options  and  warrants  are  not considered in the calculations for those
periods with net losses as the impact of the potential common shares (77,381,877
at  September  30, 2004 and 17,097,710 shares at September 30, 2003) would be to
decrease  net  loss  per  share.


<PAGE>