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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                          0000032284
<NAME>                                         Orion Diversified Technologies

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 MAY-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                              0
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    0
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         130,112
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       18,469
<OTHER-SE>                                   (148,481)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        0
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    0
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  200
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (200)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (200)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .00



</TABLE>
Opinion issued September 26, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-13-00667-CR

———————————

CHARLES LEE HAWKINS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 232nd District Court 

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 479960

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Charles Lee Hawkins, attempts to appeal from the trial court’s 

order denying his request for appointed counsel to assist in filing for postconviction DNA testing under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 64.01. 
2

See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 64.01 (West Supp. 2012). We dismiss the 

appeal.

“[A] motion for appointed counsel is a preliminary matter that precedes the 

initiation of Chapter 64 proceedings.” Gutierrez v. State, 307 S.W.3d 318, 323 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2010). “At this stage, a convicted person has only contemplated 

the filing of a motion for DNA testing.” Id. (citing TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN.

art. 64.01(c) (providing that defendant must inform trial court that he “wishes” to 

submit motion for DNA testing)). Thus, a trial court’s order denying a request for 

the appointment of counsel under article 64.01(c) is not an immediately appealable 

order. Id. Any alleged error made by the trial court in refusing to appoint counsel

must be raised in an appeal from the final order denying DNA testing. Id. If a 

reviewing court determines that the trial court erred by failing to appoint counsel, 

the case is then remanded to the trial court for the appellant to file a subsequent 

motion for DNA testing with the assistance of counsel. Id.

Here, because appellant attempts to appeal the trial court’s denial of his 

motion for the appointment of counsel, rather than a final order denying a motion 

for DNA testing under article 64.01, we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal. 

See id.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See id.; see 

also TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
3

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Massengale.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
### Part A—Best Utilization of Biological Applications
§ 507.5 Statutory authority. ( a ) The manufacture, commercial sale, possession, and reproduction of badges, identification cards, insignia, or other designs prescribed by the head of a U.S. department or agency, or colorable imitations of them, are governed by Title 18, United States Code, section 701 (18 U.S.C. 701).
( b ) The wear, manufacture, and commercial sale of military decorations, medals, badges, and their components and appurtenances, or colorable imitations thereof, are governed by 18 U.S.C. 704.
( c ) The Army's providing heraldic services to other Military departments and Federal agencies is governed by 10 U.S.C. 7594.
( d ) The display of and license to manufacture and sell the approved Service flag or Service lapel button is governed by 36 U.S.C. 901.
( e ) The ownership and licensing of trademarks, service marks, and collective marks such as DUI, RDI, SSI, and other Army-owned heraldic insignia are governed by 15 U.S.C. 1051 *et seq.,* and 10 U.S.C. 2260.
Exhibit 10.1


 


Summary of 2006 Base Salaries 


For Executive Officers


of Bakers Footwear Group, Inc.


 


The following table sets forth the base salaries as of April 3, 2006 for each of the Company’s executive officers:


 



	
            Name and Principal Position (1)
 	
            Base Salary
 
	
            Peter A. Edison
 	
            $350,000
 
	
            Chairman of the Board and
 	
             
 
	
            Chief Executive Officer
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
            Michele A. Bergerac
 	
            $350,000
 
	
            President and Director
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
            Stanley K. Tusman
 	
            $265,000
 
	
            Executive Vice President —
 	
             
 
	
            Inventory and Information
 	
             
 
	
            Management
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
            Mark D. Ianni
 	
            $250,000
 
	
            Executive Vice President —
 	
             
 
	
            General Merchandise Manager
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
            Joseph R. Vander Pluym
 	
            $245,000
 
	
            Executive Vice President —
 	
             
 
	
            Stores
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
            Lawrence L. Spanley, Jr.
 	
            $195,000
 
	
            Executive Vice President —
 	
             
 
	
            Chief Financial Officer
 	
             
 
	
            Treasurer and Secretary
 	
             
 



 


(1)  Each of the executive officers is a party to a written employment agreement with the Company and may be a party to other compensation arrangements with the Company that have been filed as exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K or in other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Bonuses under the Bakers Footwear Group, Inc. Cash Bonus Plan are determined by the Company’s Compensation Committee.  The Company’s executive officers are also eligible to participate in the Bakers Footwear Group, Inc. 2003 Stock Option Plan and the Bakers Footwear Group, Inc. 2005 Incentive Compensation Plan, receive matching employer contributions to the Company’s 401(k) plan, participate in other employee benefit plans and receive other forms of compensation.  The Company also pays premiums on a life insurance policy solely for the benefit of Mr. Tusman.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A19A0817. VERONICA H. SEWELL v. RICHARD T. SEWELL, JR.

The appellant in this c ase f ailed to com

ply with t he notice of docketing m ailed by this Court a nd with Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a), regarding the f iling of an enum eration of errors and brief within twenty day s af t er the appeal was docketed. S ee also Court o f Appeals Rule 13.

On February 

### 0 7 , 2 0 1 9 , t h i s Co u rt o rd ered t h e ap p el l an t to fi l e an en u m erat i o n

o f erro rs an d a b ri ef n o lat er t han Feb ru ary 1 8 , 2 0 1 9

. As o f t h e d at e o f t h i s o rd er, t h e
ap p el l an t ’ s en u m erat io n o f erro rs an d b ri ef s ti l l h av e n o t been fi l ed

. Acco rd i n g l y , t h i s
ap p eal i s d eem ed ab an do n ed an d i s h ereb y o rd ered DISM ISSED. Co u rt o f Ap p eal s Ru l es 7 , 2 3 (a).

No t h i n g i n t h i s o rd er s h al l p recl u d e th e ap p el l an t fro m fi l i n g a t i m el y m o t i o n fo r reco n s i d erat i o n an d s eek i n g rei n s t at em en t o f t he ap p eal

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i t n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

### March 15, 2019

03/15/2019
No. 8004.

#### Rissler et al. *v.*Edwards.

(Decided January 19, 1904.)

Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

*Messrs. Twitchell & Hartman,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Messrs. Douglass & Mengert,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Burket, C. J., Spear, Davis, Shauck, Price and Crew, JJ., concur.
### §8984. Benefits

(a) The Office may prescribe reasonable minimum standards for enhanced vision benefits plans offered under this chapter and for qualified companies offering the plans.

(b) Each contract may include more than 1 level of benefits that shall be made available to all eligible individuals.

(c) The benefits to be provided under enhanced vision benefits plans under this chapter may be of the following types:

(1) Diagnostic (to include refractive services).

(2) Preventive.

(3) Eyewear.

(d) A contract approved under this chapter shall require the qualified company to cover the geographic service delivery area specified by the Office. The Office shall require qualified companies to include visually underserved areas in their service delivery areas.

(e) If an individual has vision coverage under a health benefits plan under chapter 89 and also has coverage under a plan under this chapter, the health benefits plan under chapter 89 shall be the first payor of any benefit payments.

(Added Pub. L. 108–496, §3, Dec. 23, 2004, 118 Stat. 4008.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Dec. 23, 2004, and applicable to contracts that take effect with respect to the calendar year 2006, see section 7 of Pub. L. 108–496, set out as a note under section 8951 of this title.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3551-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Florida (FEMA-3551-EM), dated November 11, 2020, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This amendment was issued December 9, 2020.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this emergency is closed effective November 12, 2020.

                        The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance                               ( print page 556)                            (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.                    

Pete Gaynor,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2020-29289 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
§ 45.7 Element of payable claim: proximate cause. ( a ) *In general.* ( 1 ) In a case otherwise payable under this part, a claimant must prove by a preponderance of evidence that a negligent or wrongful act or omission by one or more DoD health care providers was the proximate cause of the harm suffered by the member.
( 2 ) Under section 2733a(c)(1), DoD is liable for only the portion of compensable injury, loss, or damages attributable to the medical malpractice of a DoD health care provider. To the extent other causes contributed to the personal injury or death of the member, whether pre-existing, concurrent, or subsequent, the potential amount of compensation under this regulation will be reduced by that proportion of the alternative cause(s).
( b ) *Comparative negligence.* A rule of modified comparative negligence will apply to claims under this part. If a claimant was contributorily negligent in relation to the health care provided, damages will be reduced by the proportion of fault assigned to the Service member. If the claimant's own negligence constituted more than 50% of the fault, the claim is not payable.
( c ) *Loss of chance or failure to diagnose.* A claimant may recover for loss of chance for a more favorable clinical outcome in the diagnosis and treatment of his or her illness or injury. The claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that one or more DoD health care providers in a covered MTF acting within the scope of employment had a professional duty to the claimant and by act or omission breached that duty and proximately caused harm. In proving that the claimant suffered harm, the claimant must prove that the lost chance for a better outcome or the failure to diagnose a condition is attributable to the provider or providers. The claimant must prove a substantial loss as opposed to a theoretical or de minimis loss. The portion of harm attributable to the breach of duty will be the percentage of chance lost in proportion to the overall clinical outcome. Damages will be calculated based on this portion of harm.
( d ) *Information DoD will consider in assessing proximate cause.* ( 1 ) In addition to the information submitted by the claimant, DoD may consider all relevant information in DoD records or information systems or otherwise available to DoD, including information prepared by or on behalf of DoD in connection with adjudication of the claim.
( 2 ) DoD may consider medical quality assurance records relevant to the health care provided to the patient. DoD's Clinical Quality Management Program features reviews of many circumstances of clinical care. Results of any such reviews of the care involved in the claim that occurred before or after the claim was filed may be considered by DoD in the adjudication of the claim. As required by 10 U.S.C. 1102, DoD medical quality assurance records are confidential. While such records may be used by DoD, any information contained in or derived from such records may not be disclosed to the claimant.
[86 FR 32208, June 17, 2021, as amended at 87 FR 52462, Aug. 26, 2022]
§ 776.27 Conflict of interests: Prohibited transactions. ( a ) Covered USG attorneys shall strictly adhere to current DoD Ethics Regulations and shall not: ( 1 ) Knowingly enter into any business transactions on behalf of, or adverse to, a client's interest that directly or indirectly relate to or result from the attorney-client relationship; or
( 2 ) Provide any financial assistance to a client or otherwise serve in a financial or proprietorial fiduciary or bailment relationship, unless otherwise specifically authorized by competent authority.
( b ) No covered attorney shall: ( 1 ) Use information relating to representation of a client to the disadvantage of the client unless the client consents after consultation, except as permitted or required by subpart B of this part;
( 2 ) Prepare an instrument giving the covered attorney or a person related to the covered attorney as parent, child, sibling, or spouse any gift from a client, including a testamentary gift, except where the client is related to the donee;
( 3 ) In the case of covered non-USG attorneys, accept compensation for representing a client from one other than the client unless the client consents after consultation, there is no interference with the covered attorney's independence of professional judgment or with the attorney-client relationship, and information relating to representation of a client is protected as required by § 776.25 of this part;
( 4 ) Negotiate any settlement on behalf of multiple clients in a single matter unless each client provides fully informed consent;
( 5 ) Prior to the conclusion of representation of the client, make or negotiate an agreement giving a covered attorney literary or media rights for a portrayal or account based in substantial part on information relating to representation of a client;
( 6 ) Represent a client in a matter directly adverse to a person whom the covered attorney knows is represented by another attorney who is related as parent, child, sibling, or spouse to the covered attorney, except upon consent by the client after consultation regarding the relationship; or
( 7 ) Acquire a proprietary interest in the cause of action or subject matter of litigation the covered attorney is conducting for a client.
( c ) [Reserved]
**EXHIBIT 32**

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

In connection withthe quarterly report of Quixote Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission as of the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the officersof the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to suchofficer’s knowledge:

1.                The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the datesand for the periods expressed in the Report.
| Date:  | November 8, 2005 | /s/ LESLIE J.  JEZUIT                        |
|--------|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|   |                  | Leslie J. Jezuit, *Chief  Executive Officer* |
| Date:  | November 8, 2005 | /s/ DANIEL P. GOREY                          |
|   |                  | Daniel P. Gorey, *Chief Financial Officer*   |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of theReport or as a separate disclosure.

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 25, 2013

h0617 

# Order

Clerk June 25, 2013

146777

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146777

COA: 307763

Genesee CC: 09

- 025647

- FH

GLEN ALLEN GRAY, II,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 14, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, bec ause we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 32
      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 Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Mark D. Morelli, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Sanjeev Kumar, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that based on his knowledge:  1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /S/ Mark D. Morelli
 Mark D. Morelli Chief Executive Officer  February 7, 2008    /S/ Sanjeev Kumar
 Sanjeev Kumar Chief Financial Officer  February 7, 2008