alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NO. 05-14-00634-CR

__________________________________________ 

IN THE 

TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

__________________________________________ 

SOLOMON SOLOMON,

Appellant, 

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee.

_

_________________________________________________________________ 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW 

__________________________________________________________________ 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS: 

Petitioner files this Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Petition for Discretionary 

Review and in support shows the following: 

1. Court of Appeals for the 5th District of Texas issued its judgement on June 10, 2015, 

affirming. 

2. Appellant’s Petition for Discretionary Review is due on July 10, 2015. Appellant requests an 

extension of time of thirty days, to August 25, 2015, to file its Brief. 

3. Petitioner relies on the following facts as a reasonable explanation for the requested 

extension of time. Pro se Petitioner, in addition to preparing a brief on the merits in this case 

must also devote time to the following additional matters: research. 

Therefore, Petitioner prays that this Court grant this motion for extension of time. 

Respectfully submitted, 

____/S/Solomon Solomon____

Solomon Solomon 

Pro Se 

3406 Post Oak Road

Garland, TX 75044 

214-736-4910 

PD-0965-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 7/24/2015 10:12:39 PM

Accepted 7/28/2015 2:19:04 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that this document was sent to appellee by and through the counsel of record on July 24, 

2015, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Criminal and Appellate Procedure

____/S/Solomon Solomon____

Solomon Solomon

Pro Se

3406 Post Oak Road

Garland, TX 75044

214-736-4910
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 31.1

           CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, H. M. Busby, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Planet Polymer
Technologies, Inc.

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.    I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and we have:

      a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

      b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on my evaluation; and

      c)    disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

5.    I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent function):

      a)    all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data; and

      b)    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls.

Date:  November 14, 2003
                                           /s/ H. M. BUSBY
                                           ---------------------------------
                                           H. M. Busby
                                           Chief Executive Officer and
                                           Chief Financial Officer


                                       15
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 02-068 June 3, 2002

 NRC RENEWS CHARTER 

 OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a two-year renewal of the Advisory

Committee on Nuclear Waste’s charter. The Commission is required by law to renew the charter,

which it found to be in the public interest.

The committee, which works to protect the public health and safety, was established by the NRC

in 1988 to provide independent technical review of and advice on the disposal of nuclear waste,

including all aspects of nuclear waste disposal facilities, as directed by the NRC. This encompasses

activities related to both high- and low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities, including the

licensing, operation and closure of the facilities, rulemakings, and associated regulatory guides and

technical positions developed to clarify the intent of NRC regulations. As part of these activities, the

committee reviews performance assessments of such facilities. The charter was revised to also include

matters relating to nuclear materials.

In addition, the committee works with members of the public, the Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards, other Federal agencies, State and local agencies, Indian Tribes, as well as private

and international organizations. 

The committee’s membership includes individuals who possess specific technical expertise,

along with a broad perspective in addressing safety concerns. Committee members are selected from a

variety of engineering and scientific disciplines, such as risk assessment, chemistry, mechanical

engineering, civil engineering, materials sciences, and earth sciences.

 A copy of the notice renewal will appear in an upcoming edition of The Federal Register. 

###
Exhibit 23

 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 033-54155) and Form S-8 (Nos. 33-54993, 333-16201, 333-34776, 333-45084, 333-45082, 333-57220, 333-37392 and 333-69079) of Energy East Corporation ofour report dated January 26, 2001, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.

 

 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
FORM OF 302 CERTIFICATION
			             EXHIBIT 31
			           CERTIFICATIONS

I, Steven B. Chotin, certify that:
       1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Fund America
Investors Corporation II;
       2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
quarterly report;
       3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
       4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15) for the registrant and have:
       (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
       (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
       (c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;
       5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent functions):
       (a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified any material
weaknesses in internal controls; and
       (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and
       6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this
report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: October 31, 2006                          /s/ Steven B. Chotin
      ----------------                           --------------------
                                                Steven B. Chotin
                                                Chief Executive Officer
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

No. III-02-064 December 4, 2002

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC OVERSIGHT PANEL TO HOLD TWO MEETINGS ON DAVIS-BESSE REACTOR

VESSEL HEAD DAMAGE IN PORT CLINTON, OH

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold two meetings on Tuesday, December 10,

to review the status and adequacy of recent activities at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station as a

result of the corrosion damage to the reactor vessel head. The plant, which has been shut down since

February 16, is operated by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company.

Both meetings will be at the Camp Perry Clubhouse, 1000 Lawrence Road, Bldg. 600, in Port

Clinton.

The first meeting will begin at 2 p.m. (EST), when the NRC oversight panel, set up to

coordinate the agency’s activities associated with the corrosion damage to the reactor vessel head, will

meet with utility officials. The meeting will focus on the status of repairs at the plant, results of recent

NRC inspections and upcoming activities. The public is invited to observe the business portion of the

meeting and will have an opportunity to make comments and ask questions of the NRC staff before the

meeting is adjourned.

The second meeting will begin at 7 p.m. (EST) to update the public on NRC’s activities related

to the reactor vessel head degradation and will provide a summary of the earlier meeting. The public

will be invited to ask questions and make comments. 

Transcripts of both meetings will be posted on the NRC’s web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/vessel-head-degradation.html.

The NRC oversight panel, created on April 29, includes NRC management and staff from its

Region III office in Lisle, Illinois; the NRC Headquarters office in Rockville, Maryland; and the NRC

Resident Inspector Office at the Davis-Besse site.

Documents on the Davis-Besse corrosion issue, including further details on NRC's oversight

panel activities, are posted on the NRC's web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/opsexperience/vessel-head-degradation.html.
§ 1631.8 Prompt response. ( a ) ( 1 ) When the FOIA Officer receives a request for expedited processing, he or she will determine within 10 work days whether to process the request on an expedited basis.
( 2 ) When the FOIA Officer receives a request for records which he or she, in good faith, believes is not reasonably descriptive, he or she will so advise the requester within 5 work days. The time limit for processing such a request will not begin until receipt of a request that reasonably describes the records being sought.
( b ) The FOIA Officer will either approve or deny a reasonably descriptive request for records within 20 workdays after receipt of the request. Whenever the Board cannot meet the statutory time limit for processing a request because of “unusual circumstances,” as defined in the FOIA, and the Board extends the time limit on that basis, the Board must, before expiration of the 20-day period to respond, notify the requester in writing of the unusual circumstances involved and of the date by which the Board estimates processing of the request will be completed. Where the extension exceeds 10 working days, the Board must, as described by the FOIA, provide the requester with an opportunity to modify the request or arrange an alternative time period for processing the original or modified request through the Board's FOIA Public Liaison or FOIA Officer.
( c ) When additional time is required for one of the reasons stated in paragraph (b) of this section, the FOIA Officer will extend this time period for an additional 10 work days by written notice to the requester. If the Board will be unable to process the request within this additional time period, the requester will be notified and given the opportunity to— ( 1 ) Limit the scope of the request; or
( 2 ) Arrange with the FOIA Officer an alternative time frame for processing the request.
[63 FR 41708, Aug. 5, 1998, as amended at 82 FR 24826, May 31, 2017]
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 03-147 November 17, 2003

NRC SEEKS PUBLIC COMMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION

OF REACTOR OVERSIGHT PROCESS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is seeking comment from members of the public

on the implementation of the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP), which the NRC put into effect four

years ago to revamp and improve its inspection and enforcement programs for commercial nuclear

power plants. The feedback will assist the NRC in continuing to improve its regulatory approach.

In particular, the NRC would like the public’s answers to a list of 21 questions relating to the

ROP, including the following:

-- Is the information in the inspection reports useful to you?

-- Is the ROP understandable and are the processes, procedures and products clear and written

in plain English?

-- Has the public been afforded adequate opportunity to participate in the ROP and provide

input and comments?

All 21 questions are contained in the Federal Register notice of the request for comment. The

notice is available through the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems

(ADAMS) on the agency’s Web site at this address:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html , by entering accession number ML033090492. 

Help in using ADAMS is available by contacting the NRC Public Document Room staff at 301-415-

4737 or 1-800-397-4209, or by sending an e-mail message to pdr@nrc.gov .

The comment period ends December 31. Comments may be e-mailed to nrcrep@nrc.gov or

mailed to Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001. Comments can also be delivered to

Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m.

on Federal workdays.

###
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 1073

AZHAR ELAHI

,

Petitioner

,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

,

Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of a n Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : May 20, 2019 Decided: May 30, 2019

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, KING , Circuit Judge , and DUNCAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Azhar Elahi, Petitioner Pro Se. Judith Roberta O’Sullivan, Jane Tracey Schaffner, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Azhar Elahi , a native and citizen of Pakistan , petitions for review of an order of

the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the Immigration

Judge’s denial of his request withholding of removal. * We have thoroughly reviewed the

record , including the transcript of Elahi’s merits hearing and all supporting evidence. We

conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the

agency’s factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and t hat substantial

evidence supports the Board’s decision, see INS v. Elias

- Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 481

(1992).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board.

See In re Elahi (B.I.A. Dec. 20, 2018 ). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

* Elahi does not challenge the denial of relief under the Convention Against

Torture

. While he does assert that he qualified for asylum, he declined to pursue asylum in immigration court and failed to exhaust the asylum issue before the Board. Accordingly, the issue of asylum is barred from judicial review for failure to exhaust
administrative remedies

. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2012) ; Massis v. Mukasey , 549 F.3d 631, 638

- 40 (4th Cir. 2008).
NRC NEWS U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone 301/415-820

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 03-083 June 17, 2003

NRC STAFF ISSUES DRAFT SAFETY EVALUATION FOR

WESTINGHOUSE AP1000 ADVANCED REACTOR DESIGN 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued a draft safety evaluation report for

the Westinghouse AP1000 advanced reactor design. Westinghouse Electric Company submitted

the AP1000 design certification application in March 2002.

NRC reviewers expect to finalize the safety evaluation by September 2004, and reach a

decision on the design by October 2004. If the AP1000 receives final design approval, the NRC

expects to complete a rulemaking process by December 2005, deciding whether to certify the

design in NRC’s licensing regulations. This certification process includes an opportunity for

public comment and for an informal public hearing before a decision is made on whether to issue

a final regulation.

If a reactor design has NRC final design approval, it can be referenced in an application

for a nuclear power plant license; such a design could still be subject to litigation in a licensing

proceeding. Once a design is certified in a rule, however, it is not subject to litigation in a

licensing proceeding unless it is shown that the rule, or some aspect of the rule, would not serve

the purposes for which it was adopted.

The draft safety evaluation report contains the agency’s technical evaluation for the

AP1000 application. It includes a listing of issues that remain to be resolved. The draft will be

used during NRC’s continuing discussions with Westinghouse, as well as in the design

assessment by the NRC’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.

Westinghouse has 14 days to review the report for proprietary information; the report will

then be available electronically through the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and

Management System (ADAMS) on the NRC web site at:
- 2 -

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html , by entering accession number

ML031640595. Help in using ADAMS is available from the NRC’s Public Document Room at

800/397-4209 or 301/415-4737.

Further information on the AP1000 review can be found on the NRC’s web site at this

address: http//www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/license-reviews/ap1000.html.

###
EXHIBIT
32.1
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of GeoGlobal Resources Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jean Paul
Roy, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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
      for the periods presented.
 
 
 
 
 
 /s/ Jean
Paul Roy
 ------------------------
 Jean Paul
Roy
 President
and Chief Executive Officer
 November
10, 2008
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1465

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service

located at 4832 East Highway 27 in Iron Station, North

Carolina, as the ‘‘General Charles Gabriel Post Office’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1465 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 4832 East Highway 27 in Iron Station, North

4 Carolina, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘General

5 Charles Gabriel Post Office’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

10 to the ‘‘General Charles Gabriel Post Office’’.

Passed the House of Representatives June 2, 2003.

Attest:

Clerk.
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1465

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4832 East Highway 27 in

Iron Station, North Carolina, as the ‘‘GeneralCharles Gabriel Post Office’’.