alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
January 25, 2019
No. 04

- 18

- 00850

- CR

EX PARTE Juan Gabriel CISNEROS , From the 79th Judicial District Court, Brooks County, Texas Trial Court No. 88

- 02

- 02179

- CR Honorable Federico Hinojosa, Jud ge Presiding



### ORDER

The record in this habeas corpus appeal is now complete. We order appellant’s brief due February 14 , 2019. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 31.1; 4 TH T EX

. A PP

. (S AN A NTONIO ) L OC

. R. 8.2(a). The State’s brief is due within 20 days after the date appellant’s brief is filed. See 4 TH T EX

. A PP

. (S AN A

NTONIO ) L OC

. R. 8.2 (b)

. A reply brief, if any, must be filed within 10 days after the State’s brief is filed.

_________________________________ Liz a A. Rodriguez , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 25th day of January, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE , Clerk of Court
Exhibit 4.2

CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT  TO THE  RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

Michaels
Stores, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,

DOES
HEREBY CERTIFY:

First:The Board of Directors of Michaels Stores, Inc., duly adopted resolutions setting forth a proposed amendment to
the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the corporation, declaring the amendment to be advisable and directing the amendment to be considered at the 1998 Annual Meeting of the Stockholders. The
resolution setting forth the proposed amendment is as follows:



IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, Michaels Stores, Inc. has caused this certificate to be signed by Mark V. Beasley, its Secretary, on November 13, 1998.

| |  | By: |  | /s/MARK V. BEASLEYMark V. Beasley
| |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 76

 75

 77

 84

 85

 77

 76

 78

 79

 80

 83

 87

 89

 95

 99

 98

 102

 102

 105

 108

 112

 115

 115

 140

 107

 110

 113

 117

 116

 116

 69

 69

 72

 77

 74

 73

 72

 74

 75

 74

 76

 80

 83

 88

 89

 91

 92

 94

 97

 100

 103

 104

 103

 97

 90

 91

 102

 104

 104

 103

 73

 72

 75

 80

 80

 75

 75

 76

 77

 78

 80

 81

 86

 91

 93

 94

 97

 99

 101

 104

 108

 110

 110

 109

 96

 96

 105

 107

 108

 107

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JUNE 2017 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 7, 2017

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

STATEN ISLAND ON THE SOUTH FORK MOKELUMNE RIVER
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Terry Louis Spelling, Appellant

No. 06-13-00215-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 5th District Court of Cass 

County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. CCL-M-08-

0322). Memorandum Opinion delivered by 

Justice Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and 

Justice Carter participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Terry Louis Spelling, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 11, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
### §1052. Basis established by the Revenue Act of 1932 or 1934 or by the Internal Revenue Code of 1939

#### (a) Revenue Act of 1932

If the property was acquired, after February 28, 1913, in any taxable year beginning before January 1, 1934, and the basis thereof, for purposes of the Revenue Act of 1932 was prescribed by section 113(a)(6), (7), or (9) of such Act (47 Stat. 199), then for purposes of this subtitle the basis shall be the same as the basis therein prescribed in the Revenue Act of 1932.

#### (b) Revenue Act of 1934

If the property was acquired, after February 28, 1913, in any taxable year beginning before January 1, 1936, and the basis thereof, for purposes of the Revenue Act of 1934, was prescribed by section 113(a)(6), (7), or (8) of such Act (48 Stat. 706), then for purposes of this subtitle the basis shall be the same as the basis therein prescribed in the Revenue Act of 1934.

#### (c) Internal Revenue Code of 1939

If the property was acquired, after February 28, 1913, in a transaction to which the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 applied, and the basis thereof, for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, was prescribed by section 113(a)(6), (7), (8), (13), (15), (18), (19), or (23) of such code, then for purposes of this subtitle the basis shall be the same as the basis therein prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code of 1939.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 310.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Revenue Act of 1932, referred to in section catchline and subsec. (a), is act June 6, 1932, ch. 209, 47 Stat. 169. For complete classification of the Act to the Code, see Tables.

Revenue Act of 1934, referred to in section catchline and subsec. (b), is act May 10, 1934, ch. 277, 48 Stat. 680. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

The Internal Revenue Code of 1939, referred to in section catchline and subsec. (c), is act Feb. 10, 1939, ch. 2, 53 Stat. 1. Prior to the enactment of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [formerly I.R.C. 1954], the 1939 Code was classified to former Title 26, Internal Revenue Code. For Table comparisons of the 1939 Code to the 1986 Code, see table I preceding section 1 of this title.

Section 113 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, referred to in subsec. (c), was classified to section 113 of former Title 26, Internal Revenue Code. Section 113 was repealed by section 7851(a)(1)(A) of this title. For table of comparisons of the 1939 Code to the 1986 Code, see Table I preceding section 1 of this title. See, also, section 7851(e) of this title for provision that references in the 1986 Code to a provision of the 1939 Code, not then applicable, shall be deemed a reference to the corresponding provision of the 1986 Code, which is then applicable.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 29, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58210-58211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-21793]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 4844]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Comic Grotesque: Wit and Mockery in German Art, 1870-
1940''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of

[[Page 58211]]

October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, 
as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 
FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the 
exhibition ``Comic Grotesque: Wit and Mockery in German Art, 1870-
1940'' imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United 
States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant 
to loan agreements with the foreign owners. I also determine that the 
exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Neue Galerie New 
York, New York, New York, from on or about October 15, 2004 to on or 
about February 14, 2005, and at possible additional venues yet to be 
determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these 
Determinations is ordered to be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Wolodymyr R. Sulzynsky, the Office 
of the Legal Adviser, Department of State (telephone: (202) 619-5078). 
The address is: 301 4th Street, SW., (SA-44), Room 700, Washington, DC 
20547-0001.

    Dated: September 22, 2004.
C. Miller Crouch,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural 
Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 04-21793 Filed 9-28-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-P
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-103894) pertaining to the Savings and Retirement Plan of American Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc. of our reports dated March 6, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of American
Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc., American Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc. managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of American
Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc. included in this Form 10-K/A.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLPChicago, IllinoisSeptember 18, 2006
### §1021. Sale of annuities

In case of the sale of an annuity contract, the adjusted basis shall in no case be less than zero.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 302.)
### PART III—SALES AND EXCHANGES

Sec.
631.
Gain or loss in the case of timber, coal, or domestic iron ore.
[632.
Repealed.]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1976**—Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1901(b)(22)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1798, struck out item 632 "Sale of oil or gas properties".

**1964**—Pub. L. 88–272, title II, §227(b)(2), Feb. 26, 1964, 78 Stat. 98, inserted reference to domestic iron ore in item 631.
### §273. Repealed. Pub. L. 117–317, §2(8), Dec. 27, 2022, 136 Stat. 4419

Section, act June 23, 1879, ch. 35, §7, 21 Stat. 35; July 26, 1947, ch. 343, title II, §205(a), 61 Stat. 501, related to detail of Army officer for special duty with reference to Indian education.
#### § 3583.4-1 Leasing units.

Leasing units may not exceed 640 acres consisting, if the lands are surveyed, of legal subdivisions in reasonably compact form or, if the lands are not surveyed, of a square or rectangular area with north and south and east and west boundaries so as to approximate legal subdivisions, described by metes and bounds and connected to a corner of the public survey by courses and distances. The authorized officer may prescribe a lesser area for any mineral deposit if such lesser area is adequate for an economic mining operation.
1 C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

S ECOND O RDER OF C ONTINUING A BATEMENT

Appellate case name: In the Interest of T.C., a Child

, and

In the Interest of T.L.C., a Child

A ppellate case number: 01

- 17

- 00497

- CV and

01

- 1 7

- 00 498

- CV

Trial court case number: 2014

- 71072 and

2 0 1 1

- 08360

Trial court: 30 9th District Court of Harris County

On October 5, 2017, the Court issued an order abating these appeals

, remanding

the cases to the trial court , and instructi ng it to allow appointed appellate counsel to

withdraw

. We further instructed the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant on appeal

, and have the district clerk prepare a supplemental clerk’s record containing that appointment and file it in each appeal no later than October 12, 2017

. And, on October 13, 2017, the Court issued a nother order directing the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant on appeal and have the district clerk file a supplemental clerk’s record containing the order appointing new appellate counsel by October 18, 2017

. The Clerk of this Court has not received the supplemental clerk’s

record s

.

Accordingly, we direct the trial court to IMMEDIATELY appoint new

counsel to represent appellant on appeal and have the district clerk file, in each appeal, a supplemental clerk’s record containing an order appointing new appellate

counsel no later than MONDAY , OCTOBER 23 , 2017

.

Counsel’s brief will be due 20 days from the date that counsel is appointed.

Because th ese appeal s involve parental

- termination and child

- protection case s , the Court is required to bring the appeal s to final disposition within 180 days of June 30, 2017 , the

date the notice s of appeal w ere filed in this proceeding s , so far as reasonably possible.

See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2, reprinted in T EX

. G OV ’ T

. C ODE A NN ., tit. 2, subtit. F app.2

(Vernon 2013); see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 28.4. Accordingly no extensions of time will be grant ed absent extraordinary circumstances. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(d). Counsel who agrees to handle these appeals should do so only if he or she can satisfy the briefin g deadline.

The appeals remain abated, treated as closed cases and removed from this Co urt’s active docket. The appeals will be reinstated without further order of the Court when the supplemental clerk’s records containing the trial court’s order appointing counsel are

filed with this Court.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: / s/ Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: O ctober 19, 2017
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-644

_____________________________

DESHAWN MONTAYE MCQUEEN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County.

Michael A. Flowers, Judge.

December 5, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jason W. Rodriguez, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
#### Mary Metzger, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Alphons Custodis Chimney Construction Company, Appellant.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. No opinion. Order to be settled on notice. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Scott and Dowling, JJ.
National Conservation Training Center

About UsContact UsDirections to NCTCHelp/FAQ 

                  -  NCTC Home
                  -  Library Home
                  -  Resources
                  -                      -  NCTC Catalog (Wildcat)
                    -  Library Catalogs
                    -  Publications Unit 
                  -  Publications
                  -                      -  FWS/Open Access
                    -  Journals/Newsletters
                    -  Biological Technical Publications
                    -  Bird Publications
                    -  Fish Hatchery
                    -  Posters
                    -  Refuges
                    -  Refuge Planning Documents
                    -  Wetland Publications
                    -  Links 

Conservation Library:[email protected]

**NEW** America's WILD READ Discussion - Join Us!        Distance LearningFWS Scientific Journals - **NEWEST JFWM ISSUE** Conservation History Public LecturesResources for Environmental EducatorsNCTC Video Resource CenterFWS National Digital Library

The NCTC Conservation Library provides easy access to curriculum-related materials, historic conservation texts, electronic resources and state-of-the-art delivery services. The scope of the collection includes topics covered in all NCTC training classes with an emphasis on natural resource conservation, environmental education and conservation leadership. 

**NCTC Conservation Library Catalog (WildCat)**FWS Employees Only: Access the FWS Literature Search Service electronic journals and searchable databases portal via **Inside FWS**  Library Hours (may vary due to volunteer availability):   Monday, Wednesday,Thursday 6:30 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Tuesday 6:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.    Friday 8 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

----

**Search the FWS National Digital Library****Search by Keyword:**

----

Contact the library via email at: **[email protected]**

Contact the library by mail at: 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service  National Conservation Training   Center  Conservation Library698 Conservation WayShepherdstown,   WV  25443-9713  

----

Webmaster email: 	[email protected]

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home PageDepartment of the InteriorUSA.govAbout the U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAccessibilityPrivacyNoticesDisclaimerFOIA

|  |  |
|--|--|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEWIS A. HARRY, Jr.,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

DIANE BOHUSZEWICZ, CO IV East Unit;

Z. YOUNG, Sgt. East Unit,

Defendants

- Appellees,

and

STATE OF ARIZONA; et al.,

Defendants. No. 20

- 16657

D.C. No. 2:19

- cv

- 02234

- DLR

- JFM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Douglas L. Rayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 16, 2021 * *

Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER , Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Lewis A. Harry, Jr. appeals pro se from the district

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAR 24 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 16657

court’s order denying his motions for preliminary injunction s in his 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 . We have jurisdict ion under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review for an

abuse of discretion. Jackson v. City & County of San Francisco , 746 F.3d 953,

958 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Harry ’s motion s for

preliminary injunction s because the district court lack ed authority to grant the

injunctive relief requested. See Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen’s Med.

Ctr. , 810 F.3d 631, 63 6 (9th Cir. 2015) ( w hen a plaintiff seeks injunctive relief,

“there must be a relation ship between the injury claimed in the motion for

injunctive relief and the conduct asserted in the underlying complaint” ) ;

Diamontiney v. Borg , 918 F.2d 793, 796 (9th Cir. 1990) ( holding that in the

absence of a

ny other relationship between the injury claimed in the motion for

injunctive relief and the conduct asserted in the underlying complaint , a plaintiff

must demonstrate the challenged practices affect the plaintiff’s ability to litigate

the action)

.

We lack jurisdiction over the district court ’s orders regarding discovery and

order denying Harry’s motion for appointment of counsel. See Nat’l Wildlife

Fed’n v. Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv. , 886 F.3d 803, 825 (9th Cir. 2018) (“Orders

relating to discovery

. . . are orders that regulate the conduct of litigation and are

not appealable under § 1292(a)(1).”); Kuster v. Block , 773 F.2d 1048, 1049 (9th3 20

- 16657

Cir. 1985) (order denying appointment of counsel is not a final appealable order).

Harry’s request for appointment of counsel, set forth in his opening brief , is

denied.

AFFIRMED.
**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**

I, Charles C. Baker,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of ZipRealty, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results ofoperations of ZipRealty, Inc. 

 

Date: March 9, 2011
### §3651. Findings

The Congress finds and declares that—

(1) there is a government-to-government relationship between the United States and Indian tribes;

(2) Indian tribes are sovereign entities and are responsible for exercising governmental authority over Indian lands;

(3) the rate of violent crime committed in Indian country is approximately twice the rate of violent crime committed in the United States as a whole;

(4) in any community, a high rate of violent crime is a major obstacle to investment, job creation and economic growth;

(5) tribal justice systems are an essential part of tribal governments and serve as important forums for ensuring the health and safety and the political integrity of tribal governments;

(6) Congress and the Federal courts have repeatedly recognized tribal justice systems as the most appropriate forums for the adjudication of disputes affecting personal and property rights on Native lands;

(7) enhancing tribal court systems and improving access to those systems serves the dual Federal goals of tribal political self-determination and economic self-sufficiency;

(8) there is both inadequate funding and an inadequate coordinating mechanism to meet the technical and legal assistance needs of tribal justice systems and this lack of adequate technical and legal assistance funding impairs their operation;

(9) tribal court membership organizations have served a critical role in providing training and technical assistance for development and enhancement of tribal justice systems;

(10) Indian legal services programs, as funded partially through the Legal Services Corporation, have an established record of providing cost effective legal assistance to Indian people in tribal court forums, and also contribute significantly to the development of tribal courts and tribal jurisprudence; and

(11) the provision of adequate technical assistance to tribal courts and legal assistance to both individuals and tribal courts is an essential element in the development of strong tribal court systems.

(Pub. L. 106–559, §2, Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2778.)

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

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 106–559, §1, Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2778, provided that: "This Act [enacting this chapter and amending section 3621 of this title and sections 1629e and 1629g of Title 43, Public Lands] may be cited as the 'Indian Tribal Justice Technical and Legal Assistance Act of 2000'."

#### Availability of Funds for Courts or Law Enforcement Officers of Certain Tribes or Villages

Pub. L. 108–199, div. B, title I, §112(a)(1), Jan. 23, 2004, 118 Stat. 62, which prohibited use of funds provided in div. B of Pub. L. 108–199 or on or after Jan. 23, 2004, for courts or law enforcement officers for a tribe or village in which fewer than 25 Native members live in the village year round or that is located within certain areas, was repealed by Pub. L. 111–211, title II, §247(e)(1), July 29, 2010, 124 Stat. 2297.