alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 2, 2018

No. 04-16-00827-CV

Frances M. BUPP, Martha King Berglund, Evelyn Seydler Martin, Andrea Lee Castillo, Mary C. 

Forister, Shirley Dixon, and Cindy Forister,

Appellants

v.

Harold Joe BISHOP, Jr., Individually and as Trustee of the Bishop Management Trust, General 

Partner of J & K Bishop Partnership, LTD, and as Executor of the Estate of Melanie Kay Bishop,

Appellees

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Karnes County, Texas

Trial Court No. 15-01-00011-CVK

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice (Not Participating)

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

The court has considered the appellees’ amended motion for en banc reconsideration and 

the motion is DENIED.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 2nd day of February, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
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 GoAmerica, Inc. (the "Company")
on  Form  10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I,  Francis  J.  Elenio, 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) of the
Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;and

(2)  The  information  contained  in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects,  the  consolidated  financial condition of the Company as of the dates
presented  and consolidated results of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.

Dated:  August 14, 2003

                                   /s/  Francis  J.  Elenio
                                ------------------------------
                                     Francis  J.  Elenio
                                   Chief  Financial  Officer



This  certification  has  been  furnished  solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002.


<PAGE>
July 6th, 2015

Mr. Joseph M. Lam

280 Newport Neck Road

Newport, NJ 08345

Dear Mr. Lam:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA−2015−1520) on 

May 8, 2015, but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent 

does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the 

request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Opinion issued February 23, 2024

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 24
- 00145
- CV

——————————— IN RE ROY J. ELIZONDO III , Relat or

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDU M OPINION On February 22, 2024, Roy J. Elizondo III filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s June 20, 2023 order granting partial summary judgment in favor of Cadence Bank, N.A. 1 We deny the p etition

.

1 The underlying case is Cadence Bank , N.A. v. Roy J. Elizondo III and Roy J. Elizondo III PLLC , cause number 2014

- 65226 , pending in the 234th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Lauren Reeder presiding.2

Elizondo’s request for an emergency stay of the underlying proceedings is dismissed

as moot. PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Hightower.
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

Washington, D.C. 

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 91957 / May 20, 2021

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced the temporary suspension of trading 

in the securities of Creative Waste Solutions, Inc. (CWSS) commencing at 9:30 a.m. EDT on 

May 21, 2021 and terminating at 11:59 p.m. EDT on June 4, 2021.

The Commission temporarily suspended trading in the securities of the foregoing company due 

to a lack of current and accurate information about the company because it has not filed certain 

periodic reports with the Commission. This order was entered pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act).

The Commission cautions brokers, dealers, shareholders and prospective purchasers that they 

should carefully consider the foregoing information along with all other currently available 

information and any information subsequently issued by this company.

Brokers and dealers should be alert to the fact that, pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11, at 

the termination of the trading suspension, no quotation may be entered relating to the securities 

of the subject company unless and until the broker or dealer has strictly complied with all of the 

provisions of the rule. If any broker or dealer is uncertain as to what is required by the rule, it 

should refrain from entering quotations relating to the securities of this company that has been 

subject to the trading suspension until such time as it has familiarized itself with the rule and is 

certain that all of its provisions have been met. Any broker or dealer with questions regarding

the rule should contact the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington, DC 

at (202) 551-5777. If any broker or dealer enters any quotation which is in violation of the rule,

the Commission will consider the need for prompt enforcement action. 

If any broker, dealer or other person has any information which may relate to this matter, they 

should immediately communicate it to the Delinquent Filings Branch of the Division of 

Enforcement at (202) 551-5466, or by e-mail at DelinquentFilings@sec.gov.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 130074 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 130074 COA: 254008 Wayne CC: 03-012337 WILLIE MONROE, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e September 27, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0424 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2006

Clerk
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.

SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of NorAm Capital Holdings, Inc. (Registrant) for the annual period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Report), I, Anthony J. Renteria, Chief Executive Officer, hereby 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) |  | This 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 this Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Registrant.











|                        |                                                           |                         | 
|----------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------- | 
|Date: December 28, 2007 | By:                                                       | /s/ Anthony J. Renteria | 
|                        | Anthony J. Renteria
President and Chief Executive Officer |
### **CHAPTER 45—URBAN PARK AND RECREATION RECOVERY PROGRAM**

Sec.
2501 to 2514. Omitted, Transferred, or Repealed.
Exhibit
      32.1




**CERTIFICATIONS
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION
      1350)**









In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Teliphone Corp. (the "Company") on
      Form
      10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, George Metrakos,
      Chief
      Executive 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:




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




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


By:
            /s/George MetrakosGeorge
                MetrakosChief
                Executive Officer




Date:
      May
      14, 2007
1

David

Below you will find the answers to your questions. Can you please forward me the 05/11/11 and 05/10/11 emails, I do not think I was a recipient of them. I did receive the 06/22/11 email concerning liquid pitch storage tanks. Please let me know if you need any additional information.

Thanks
Patricia Bilskis

Alcoa Intalco Environmental Staff Specialist
4050 Mountain View Road Ferndale WA, 98248

Office: 360

- 384

- 7267

Cell: 360

- 201

- 3430

1) The range of sulfur content in the coke utilized t o make anodes used in the reduction cells over the last year of operation. Last year Intalco used coke that ranged from 0.7

- 3.3%S to make green anodes. Our average %S in green anodes never exceeds
3% because we use varying amounts of coke of each concen tration (see attached spreadsheet that shows, the monthly average %S in

green anodes.)

2) The highest sulfur content in the coke utilized to make anodes used in the reduction cells at any time during the last 10 years. The highest monthly average sulfu r content in the coke utilized to make anodes during the last 10 years was 3.0%. The highest sulfur content coke used as a constituent of green anodes was

3.3%. (see attached spreadsheet that shows, the monthly average %S in green anodes.)

3) The lowe st sulfur content anode coke that you believe you could consistently obtain in sufficient quantities to operate your facility at capacity, long term (e.g. over the next 10 years).2

Given concerns about the future availability of low sulfur coke,
Alcoa believes that the lowest sulfur content anode coke
that will be available in sufficient quantities to operate Wenatchee at capacity long

term is 3% sulfur. This 3% sulfur coke will be a blend of

low and high sulfur material.

4) The ICR did not di rectly ask whether or not your facility utilizes any new pitch storage tanks (i.e. tanks installed after the proposal of 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart LL on 09/26/96)? Do you have any new pitch storage tanks that are subject to Subpart LL at your facility?
No, Intalco does not have any pitch storage tanks that were installed after the proposal of 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart LL

on 09/26/96. Our pitch storage tanks were installed late 1990.

5) If you have any existing pitch storage tanks at your facility

that are s ubject to Subpart LL and that have emissions controls installed on them (even though those controls are not required under Subpart LL) please provide the information necessary to evaluate those controls [i.e. submit Table(s) 1 through 5 found
in the ICR fo r the associated control device(s), if applicable].
A coke filled canister is attached to at the final exhaust point of the pitch tanks. Emissions that result from diurnal temperature fluctuations are controlled by the coke filled
canister (this respons e can be found in #15 of the returned information request).

(See attached file: AVG_S_IN_P.Coke.xlsx)
Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America
1750 Hennepin Avenue
Minneapolis, MN  55403
(612) 347-6500

May 5, 2000

VIA EDGAR

_________

Securities and Exchange Commission
Division of Investment Management
Office of Insurance Products
450 Fifth Street N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549


     RE:     Allianz Life Variable Account B
             File No.  33-76190
             ________________________________

Dear Sir/Madam:

Pursuant to Securities  Act Rule 497(j),  we hereby  certify that the Prospectus
and  Statement of Additional  Information  that would have been filed under Rule
497(c) does not differ  from that  contained  in the most recent  Post-effective
Amendment, which Amendment has been filed electronically.

If you  have  any  questions  or  comments,  please  feel  free to  contact  the
undersigned.


Sincerely,

Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America


By:  /s/  Catherine L. Mielke
    ________________________________
          Catherine L. Mielke
Editorial Note on Part 43
Editorial Note: For establishment and determination of certain rates for use in connection with recovery from tortiously liable third persons, see notice documents published by the Office of Management and Budget each year in the Federal Register.

§ 43.1 Administrative determination and assertion of claims. ( a ) The head of a Department or Agency of the United States responsible for the furnishing of hospital, medical, surgical or dental care and treatment (including prostheses and medical appliances), or his designee, shall determine whether such hospital, medical, surgical or dental care and treatment was or will be furnished for an injury or disease caused under circumstances entitling the United States to recovery under the Act of September 25, 1962 (Pub. L. 87-693); and, if it is so determined, shall, subject to the provisions of § 43.3, assert a claim against such third person for the reasonable value of such care and treatment. The Department of Justice, or a Department or Agency responsible for the furnishing of such care and treatment may request any other Department or Agency to investigate, determine, or assert a claim under the regulations in this part.
( b ) Each Department or Agency is authorized to implement the regulations in this part to give full force and effect thereto.
( c ) The provisions of the regulations in this part shall not apply with respect to hospital, medical, surgical, or dental care and treatment (including prostheses and medical appliances) furnished by the Veterans Administration to an eligible veteran for a service-connected disability under the provisions of chapter 17 of title 38 of the U.S. Code.
[Order No. 289-62, 27 FR 11317, Nov. 16, 1962]
### §8707. Petition and review

#### (a) Petition

#### (1) In general

A person subject to an order issued under this chapter may file with the Secretary a petition—

(A) stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order, is not established in accordance with law; and

(B) requesting a modification of the order or an exemption from the order.

#### (2) Hearing

The Secretary shall give the petitioner an opportunity for a hearing on the petition, in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary.

#### (3) Ruling

After the hearing, the Secretary shall make a ruling on the petition. The ruling shall be final, subject to review as set forth in subsection (b).

#### (4) Limitation on petition

Any petition filed under this subsection challenging an order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order, shall be filed not less than 2 years after the effective date of the order, provision, or obligation subject to challenge in the petition.

#### (b) Review

#### (1) Commencement of action

The district courts of the United States in any district in which a person who is a petitioner under subsection (a) resides or conducts business shall have jurisdiction to review the ruling of the Secretary on the petition of the person, if a complaint requesting the review is filed no later than 30 days after the date of the entry of the ruling by the Secretary.

#### (2) Process

Service of process in proceedings under this subsection shall be conducted in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

#### (3) Remands

If the court in a proceeding under this subsection determines that the ruling of the Secretary on the petition of the person is not in accordance with law, the court shall remand the matter to the Secretary with directions—

(A) to make such ruling as the court shall determine to be in accordance with law; or

(B) to take such further action as, in the opinion of the court, the law requires.

#### (c) Enforcement

The pendency of proceedings instituted under this section shall not impede, hinder, or delay the Attorney General or the Secretary from obtaining relief under section 8708 of this title.

(Pub. L. 115–254, div. E, §1308, Oct. 5, 2018, 132 Stat. 3480.)
### §4015. Judicial review; admissibility

#### (a) District court review of grants or denials; erroneous determination

If the Secretary grants or denies, in whole or in part, an application for a certificate of review or for an amendment to a certificate, or revokes or modifies a certificate pursuant to section 4014(b) of this title, any person aggrieved by such determination may, within 30 days of the determination, bring an action in any appropriate district court of the United States to set aside the determination on the ground that such determination is erroneous.

#### (b) Exclusive provision for review

Except as provided in subsection (a), no action by the Secretary or the Attorney General pursuant to this subchapter shall be subject to judicial review.

#### (c) Inadmissibility in antitrust proceedings

If the Secretary denies, in whole or in part, an application for a certificate of review or for an amendment to a certificate, or revokes or amends a certificate, neither the negative determination nor the statement of reasons therefor shall be admissible in evidence, in any administrative or judicial proceeding, in support of any claim under the antitrust laws.

(Pub. L. 97–290, title III, §305, Oct. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 1243.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 8, 1982, see section 312 of Pub. L. 97–290, set out as a note under section 4011 of this title.
Exhibit 10.6


Base Salaries of Executive Officers of the Registrant







As of April 1, 2016, the following are the base salaries (on an annual basis) of the executive officers of Old Point Financial Corporation:







	
Robert F. Shuford, Sr.

	 	
$

	
300,000

	 
	
Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Robert F. Shuford, Jr.

	 	
$

	
300,000

	 
	
Executive Vice President/Bank


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Joseph R. Witt

	 	
$

	
285,600

	 
	
Chief Business Development Officer & Senior Vice President


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Laurie D. Grabow

	 	
$

	
204,000

	 
	
Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President/Finance


Old Point Financial Corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Eugene M. Jordan, II

	 	
$

	
183,600

	 
	
Secretary & Executive Vice President/Trust


Old Point Financial Corporation
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 246 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 246

 Honoring the memory of the victims of the heinous attack at the Pulse 
                      nightclub on June 12, 2016.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 12, 2019

    Mr. Scott of Florida (for himself and Mr. Rubio) submitted the 
        following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Honoring the memory of the victims of the heinous attack at the Pulse 
                      nightclub on June 12, 2016.

Whereas, on June 12, 2016, a gunman inspired by the Islamic State of Iraq and 
        Syria targeted the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, where he killed 
        49 innocent victims and wounded dozens more in a despicable attack;
Whereas the attack at the Pulse nightclub was an attack on the LGBTQ community, 
        the Hispanic community, the City of Orlando, the State of Florida, and 
        the United States;
Whereas the Orlando community continues to mourn the tragic loss of life, but 
        has demonstrated remarkable strength, unity, and resilience in the 
        aftermath of the horrendous event;
Whereas June 12 is designated as ``Pulse Remembrance Day'' in the State of 
        Florida to honor the victims and survivors of the senseless attack;
Whereas the people of the United States continue to pray for those affected by 
        the tragedy; and
Whereas June 12, 2019, marks 3 years since the lives of the 49 innocent victims 
        were tragically cut short by the senseless act of terrorism: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) commemorates the 49 victims killed in the attack at the 
        Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, on June 12, 2016, and 
        offers heartfelt condolences to the families, loved ones, and 
        friends of the victims;
            (2) honors the dozens of survivors of the attack and 
        pledges continued resolve to stand against terrorism and hate; 
        and
            (3) expresses gratitude to the brave law enforcement and 
        emergency medical personnel who responded to the attack.
                                 <all>
```