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

San Antonio, Texas

May 27, 2016

No. 04-16-00333-CV

IN RE Cleo BUSTAMANTE, Jr.

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

On May 26, 2016, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency motion 

for temporary relief. This court is of the opinion that a serious question concerning the 

mandamus relief sought requires further consideration. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(b). The 

respondent and the real parties in interest may file a response to the petition for writ of 

mandamus in this court no later than June 20, 2016. Any such response must conform to 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.4. 

Relator’s request for emergency relief is GRANTED. All proceedings in the trial court 

on this matter are stayed pending final resolution of the petition filed in this court.

It is so ORDERED on May 27, 2016.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ________________________________

 Keith E. Hottle, Clerk

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 12-05-27517, styled Roberto Fernandez and Maria Imelda Flores v. 

Abaco Consultants, Inc., et al, pending in the 365th Judicial District Court, Maverick County, Texas, the Honorable 

Amado J. Abascal, III presiding.
§ 720.43 Points of contact. ( a ) Authorities issuing requests for return or for other action under this instruction may contact the following activities: ( 1 ) Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers-14), Washington, DC 20370-5000 (For Navy members and their family members).
( 2 ) Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps (Code JAR), Washington, DC 20380-0001 (For Marine Corps members and their family members).
( 3 ) Director, Office of Civilian Personnel Management (Code OOL), 800 N. Quincy Street, Arlington, VA 22203-1998 (For civilian personnel, including non-appropriated fund employees and their family members).
( b ) Upon receipt of a request for action under this instruction, the Office of Civilian Personnel Management will forward the request to the appropriate responsible official for action in accordance with § 720.44.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           11265
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   168419
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1847
<INVENTORY>                                     207690
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                408609
<PP&E>                                          779191
<DEPRECIATION>                                  394039
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1078382
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           185879
<BONDS>                                         555637
<COMMON>                                         83465
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       98988
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1078382
<SALES>                                         756466
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                756466
<CGS>                                           550775
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   653926
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (22750)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               30754
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  94536
<INCOME-TAX>                                     33879
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              60657
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     60657
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .73
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .73
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                               Exhibit 13.(a)(1)

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                  AS ENACTED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Ricoh Company, Ltd. (the
"Company") for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Masamitsu Sakurai,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, that:

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

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

Date:  June 29, 2005

                                       By: /s/ Masamitsu Sakurai
                                          ------------------------------------
                                          Masamitsu Sakurai
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
### §426c. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 426c was editorially reclassified as section 8353 of this title.
### §2009cc–18. Authorization of appropriations

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subchapter $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

(Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §384S, as added Pub. L. 110–234, title VI, §6027(f), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1183, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title VI, §6027(f), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 1944; amended Pub. L. 113–79, title VI, §6028, Feb. 7, 2014, 128 Stat. 850; Pub. L. 115–334, title VI, §6427, Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4771.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 enacted identical sections. Pub. L. 110–234 was repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2009cc–18, Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §384S, as added Pub. L. 107–171, title VI, §6029, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 402; amended Pub. L. 109–171, title I, §1403(a), Feb. 8, 2006, 120 Stat. 6, related to subchapter funding through fiscal year 2006, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 110–234, title VI, §6027(f), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1183, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4, title VI, §6027(f), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 1944, effective May 22, 2008.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–334 substituted "2023" for "2018".

2014—Pub. L. 113–79 substituted "$20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2018" for "$50,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2008 through 2012".

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

#### Effective Date

Enactment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as a note under section 8701 of this title.
Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm

We consent to
the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-3, No.
333-138417, 333-15533, 33-58736, 33-60229, 33-78760, 33-72170, 33-68542) and
(Forms S-8, No. 33-45348, 33-75466, 33-88826, 333-87153, 333-89308 and
333-123712) of Enzo Biochem, Inc. and in the related Prospectus of our report
dated October 12, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedule of Enzo Biochem, Inc., and the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting of Enzo Biochem, Inc. included in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2007.

/s/ Ernst
& Young LLP

Melville, New
York
October 12, 2007

---
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned President and ChiefExecutive Officer of Equity Oil Company, a Colorado corporation (the "Company"),hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of theCompany for the period ended March 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and thatinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

|                                                                            | /s/ Russell V. Florence |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|
| Russell V. Florence, Treasurer    and Chief Financial Officer
May 12, 2004 |
NUMBER 13-19-00260-CV

COURT OF APPEALS 

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

IN THE INTEREST OF A.A.A. AND J.L.A. JR., CHILDREN

On appeal from the 343rd District 

Court of Bee County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina

Appellant Jose Luis Aguilar filed a notice of appeal from an “Order in Suit for 

Modification of Support and to Confirm Support Arrearage” issued on April 9, 2019 in 

trial court cause number B-08-1001-CV-C in the 343rd District Court of Bee County, 

Texas. We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution because appellant has failed to 

timely file a second amended brief as ordered by this Court. 

The clerk’s record was filed on September 9, 2019. On October 11, 2019, this

Court notified appellant by letter that there was not a reporter’s record and that 
2

appellant’s brief was due on or before November 12, 2019. Subsequently, appellant

filed his original brief and then his first amended brief with a motion for leave to file 

the brief. On January 6, 2020, this Court notified appellant that his amended brief was 

not in compliance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

On January 30, 2020, we granted appellant’s motion for leave to file the brief 

and ordered appellant to file an amended brief on or before March 2, 2020. We advised 

appellant that we would not grant any further extensions of time to file the brief “absent

exigent circumstances.” Nevertheless, more than nine months has passed and appellant 

has not filed a second amended brief or a motion for extension for time to file a second 

amended brief. 

This Court has the authority to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution or because 

the appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules, a court order, or 

a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3(b),(c); Smith v. DC Civil Constr., LLC, 521 S.W.3d 75, 76 (Tex. App.—San 

Antonio 2017, no pet.). The appellant has failed to comply with the appellate rules or respond 

to the directives of the Clerk regarding filing an amended brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).

Based on the foregoing, we strike appellant’s first amended, non-conforming brief, prohibit 

appellant from filing another, and proceed as if appellant had failed to file a brief. See id.

38.9(a). We dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution and because the appellant failed to 

comply with the requirements of the appellate rules and directives from the Clerk. See id. R. 

38.8(a), 38.9(a), 42.3(b),(c); Johnson v. Dallas Hous. Auth., 179 S.W.3d 770, 770 (Tex. 

App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.).
3

JAIME TIJERINA

Justice

Delivered and filed the 

3rd day of December, 2020.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



We have issued our report dated March 17, 2000, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements included in the 1999 Annual Report of Intelect
Communications, Inc., on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999. We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the
following registration statements:

     Form S-3, File No. 333-30212, filed February 11, 2000
     Form S-8, File No. 333-86099, filed August 30, 1999;
     Form S-8, File No. 333-86097, filed August 30, 1999;
     Form S-3, File No. 333-86095, filed August 27, 1999;
     Form S-8, File No. 333-75651, filed April 2, 1999;
     Form S-8, File No. 333-61333, filed August 13, 1998;
     Form S-3, File No. 333-53451, filed May 22, 1998;
     Form S-3, File No. 333-49379, filed April 2, 1998;
     Form S-8, File No. 333-03246, filed January 2, 1998;
     Form S-3, File No. 333-35841, filed December 30, 1997; and
     Form S-8, File No. 333-05918, filed December 23, 1997.



/s/ Grant Thornton LLP


Dallas, Texas
March 17, 2000
### §8318. Veterinary training

The Secretary of Agriculture may develop a program to maintain in all regions of the United States a sufficient number of Federal and State veterinarians and veterinary teams, including those based at colleges of veterinary medicine, who are well trained in recognition and diagnosis of exotic and endemic animal diseases and who are capable of providing effective services before, during, and after emergencies.

(Pub. L. 107–171, title X, §10504, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 510; Pub. L. 115–334, title XII, §12106, Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4943.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was not enacted as part of the Animal Health Protection Act which comprises this chapter.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–334 inserted "and veterinary teams, including those based at colleges of veterinary medicine," before "who are well trained" and "and who are capable of providing effective services before, during, and after emergencies" before period at end.
1233.214 Alternative dispute resolution (ADR). ( c ) The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1990, Public Law 101-552, as reauthorized by the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1996, Public Law 104-320, authorizes and encourages agencies to use mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and other techniques for the prompt and informal resolution of disputes, either before or after appeal, and for other purposes. ADR procedures may be used when— ( 1 ) There is mutual consent by the parties to participate in the ADR process (with consent being obtained either before or after an issue in controversy has arisen); and either
( 2 ) Prior to the submission of a claim; or
( 3 ) In resolution of a formal claim.
( d ) ( 1 ) Use of ADR shall be coordinated with counsel. For all matters filed with the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA), the CBCA Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures contained in 48 CFR 6101.54 shall be followed.
( 2 ) For other matters, pursuant to the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA), DOT has appointed a Dispute Resolution Specialist, who is responsible for the operations of the Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Center may provide an internal DOT neutral agreeable to the parties to conduct any of the alternative means of dispute resolution set forth in the ADRA, 5 U.S.C. 571(3), on a non-reimbursable basis for DOT operating administrations and their contracting partners. Alternative means of dispute resolution include settlement negotiations, conciliation, facilitation, mediation, fact-finding, mini-trials, and arbitration, or any combination of these methods. The Center may also arrange for an external public or private neutral at the parties' expense.
### §3502. Civil penalty

(a) If the Secretary determines that a person—

(1) has failed to submit a report in accordance with the provisions of section 3501 of this title, or

(2) has knowingly submitted a report under section 3501 of this title—

(A) which does not contain all the information required to be in such report, or

(B) which contains information that is misleading or false,

such person shall be subject to a civil penalty imposed by the Secretary. The amount of any such civil penalty shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of this section. Any such civil penalty shall be recoverable in a civil action brought by the Attorney General of the United States in an appropriate district court of the United States.

(b) The amount of any civil penalty imposed by the Secretary under subsection (a) of this section shall be such amount as the Secretary determines to be appropriate to carry out the purposes of this chapter, except that such amount shall not exceed 25 percent of the fair market value, on the date of the assessment of such penalty, of the interest in agricultural land with respect to which such violation occurred.

(Pub. L. 95–460, §3, Oct. 14, 1978, 92 Stat. 1265.)
Case: 1:11-cv-09236 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/28/11 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:1
Case: 1:11-cv-09236 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/28/11 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:2
Case: 1:11-cv-09236 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/28/11 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:3
Case: 1:11-cv-09236 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/28/11 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:4
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

THE SECRETARY

MEMORANDUM

TO: The Designated Agency Ethics Official 

Deputy Agency Ethics Officials

THROUGH: The General Counsel ←

FROM The Secretary

SUBJECT: Delegation of Authority

I. DELEGATION

Under the authority vested in me by Section 412 of the Department of Education 

Organization Act (DEOA), 20 U.S.C. Section 3472, Public Law 96-88, I hereby 

delegate to you the authority to serve as "agency designees" for the purposes of 5 

C.F.R. Sections 2635.403(b), 2635.502(a),(c),(d), and (e), 2635.605(b), and 

2635.606(b). Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, amendments 

to the authority delegated herein are included within the scope of this delegation.

II. RESERVATIONS

None.

III. REDELEGATION

This authority may not be further redelegated. 

IV. CERTIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department's Principal 

Delegations Control Officer.

 /s/ 

 Richard W. Riley

OGC Clearance and Date: /s/ R. Wexler, 4/27/93

Certified Date: 5/10/93

Departmental Delegations Control Officer: /s/ Wilma J. Hodo

Control Number: EAEG/60
#### Daniel Kornblum, Respondent, v Blank Rome Tenzer Greenblatt, LLP, Doing Business as Blank Rome LLP, Appellant, and Carol Kornblum, Respondent.

[834 NYS2d 245]

In an action seeking a refund of an alleged overpayment under a legal retainer agreement, the defendant/counterclaim plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County *483(Gigante, J.), dated August 2, 2006, which denied its motion, in effect, for leave to renew that branch of its prior motion which was for summary judgment on its counterclaim for an account stated.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

In an order dated January 11, 2006 the Supreme Court, inter alia, denied that branch of the motion of the defendant/ counterclaim plaintiff, Blank Rome Tenzer Greenblatt, LLR doing business as Blank Rome LLP (hereinafter Blank Rome), which was for summary judgment on its counterclaim for an account stated. The Supreme Court concluded that Blank Rome had not satisfied its burden of establishing its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law because, in part, “counsel’s affirmation in support of [its] motion, made without personal knowledge of the facts, is not competent.” Blank Rome did not take an appeal from that order, but filed a motion two months later, which included the affidavit of a Blank Rome partner. Although Blank Rome denominated the motion as a second motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for an account stated, the Supreme Court treated it as a motion for leave to renew that branch of the previous motion which was for summary judgment on that counterclaim. The Supreme Court denied the motion, in part on the ground that the partner’s affidavit could have been submitted with the earlier motion. We affirm.

The Supreme Court properly treated the motion as one for renewal, rather than as a successive summary judgment motion, and properly denied it, because Blank Rome did not proffer a reasonable excuse for failing to submit the attorney’s affidavit with its earlier motion (see CPLR 2221 [e] [3]; *Kaufman v Kunis,*14 AD3d 542 [2005]; *Albanese v Hametz,*4 AD3d 379, 380 [2004]; *LaRosa v Trapani,*271 AD2d 506, 506-507 [2000]). Even considered as a successive motion for summary judgment, it was properly denied because such successive motions are disfavored (see *Williams v City of White Plains,*6 AD3d 609, 609 [2004]; *Capuano v Platzner Intl. Group,*5 AD3d 620, 621 [2004]), and Blank Rome’s motion did not fit within the narrow exception to this general proscription *(cf. Varsity Tr. v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y.,*300 AD2d 38, 39 [2002]). Crane, J.P., Skelos, Covello and Dickerson, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000032312
<NAME> EMCEE BROADCAST PRODUCTS,INC.

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,120,810
<SECURITIES>                                 1,768,269
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,018,283
<ALLOWANCES>                                    60,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,133,814
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,550,365
<PP&E>                                       2,785,635
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,201,493
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,645,436
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          753,277
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                        73,084
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,187,509
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,645,436
<SALES>                                      2,935,002
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,935,002
<CGS>                                        2,432,048
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,179,974
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (104,826)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                26,986
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              41,959
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,140,146)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (341,100)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (799,046)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (799,046)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.20)


</TABLE>
### §173. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated such amounts as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of sections 171 to 173 of this title. Any amounts so appropriated, and any funds received by the Secretary under said sections, shall remain permanently available for the purposes of said sections without regard to the provisions of any other laws relating to the availability and disposition of appropriated funds and the disposition of funds collected by officers or agencies of the United States.

(Mar. 5, 1942, ch. 140, §3, 56 Stat. 128.)