alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,089

EX PARTE QUEEN ESTHER JORDAN, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1186574 

IN THE 184 DISTRICT COURT FROM HARRIS COUNTY TH

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of a

controlled substance and sentenced to six month’s imprisonment in a state jail. Applicant did not

appeal her conviction. 

Applicant contends that she has newly discovered evidence that she is actually innocent of

this offense. The trial court has determined that no rational jury would have convicted Applicant in

light of the new evidence, which was previously unavailable to Applicant. The evidence, a lab report
that was not available at the time of trial, shows that there was no controlled substance in the

evidence seized from Applicant. Applicant is entitled to relief. Ex parte Elizondo, 947 S.W.2d 202,

209 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). 

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 1186574 in the 184 Judicial District Court of th

Harris County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Harris County

to answer the charge against her.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Parole Division.

Delivered: February 4, 2009

Do Not Publish
EXHIBIT 12.2


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-15(e) OR 15d-15(e) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
                       ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Tam Cheuk Ho, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of China Natural Resources,
     Inc. (the "Registrant");

2.   Based on my knowledge, this 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 year covered by this report;

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

4.   The Registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
     establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
     in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
     disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 year in which this report is being
     prepared;

     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant's disclosure controls and
     procedures and presented in this report our conclusion about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
     the year covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

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

5.   The Registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
     our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
     the Registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant's board
     of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
     operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
     likely to adversely affect the Registrant's ability to record, process,
     summarize and report financial information; and

     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
     employees who have a significant role in the Registrant's internal control
     over financial reporting.

Date:  June 9, 2006

/s/ Tam Cheuk Ho
Chief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:97cr43/LAC

STACY D. PERRY,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER

This cause is before the Court on limited remand from the Eleventh Circuit Court of

Appeals. The remand is limited to a determination of when Defendant delivered his notice

of appeal to prison authorities, whether the notice of appeal was therefore timely filed, and

if untimely, whether there exists excusable neglect or good cause to justify an extension of

time. See United States v. Ward, 696 F.2d 1315, 1317-18 (11th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the

Defendant shall have until September 10, 2008, to respond to this Order.

ORDERED on this 26th day of August, 2008.

 s/L.A. Collier 

Lacey A. Collier

Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:97-cr-00043-LC-MD Document 170 Filed 08/26/08 Page 1 of 1
§ 205.506 Granting accreditation. ( a ) Accreditation will be granted when: ( 1 ) The accreditation applicant has submitted the information required by §§ 205.503 through 205.505;
( 2 ) The accreditation applicant pays the required fee in accordance with § 205.640(c); and
( 3 ) The Administrator determines that the applicant for accreditation meets the requirements for accreditation as stated in § 205.501, as determined by a review of the information submitted in accordance with §§ 205.503 through 205.505 and, if necessary, a review of the information obtained from a site evaluation as provided for in § 205.508.
( b ) On making a determination to approve an application for accreditation, the Administrator will notify the applicant of the granting of accreditation in writing, stating: ( 1 ) The area(s) for which accreditation is given;
( 2 ) The effective date of the accreditation;
( 3 ) Any terms and conditions for the correction of minor noncompliances; and
( 4 ) For a certifying agent who is a private entity, the amount and type of security that must be established to protect the rights of production and handling operations certified by such certifying agent.
( c ) The accreditation of a certifying agent shall continue in effect until such time as the certifying agent fails to renew accreditation as provided in § 205.510(c), the certifying agent voluntarily ceases its certification activities, or accreditation is suspended or revoked pursuant to § 205.665.
EXHIBIT
3.3


RFMC WILLOWBRIDGE FUND,
L.P.









FOURTH AMENDMENT
TO




AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT




This
FOURTH AMENDMENT  TO AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT, dated as of March 10, 2010 (this “Amendment”), to the Amended and
Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of RFMC Willowbridge Fund, L.P., a
Delaware limited partnership (the “Partnership”), dated as of April 5, 1998, as
amended by that First Amendment to Amended and Restated Limited Partnership
Agreement dated as of December 31, 2002, that Second Amendment to Amended and
Restated Limited Partnership Agreement dated as of November 12, 2003 and that
Third Amendment to Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement dated as
of September 8, 2006 (collectively, the “Agreement”), is made and entered by and
between Ruvane Fund Management Corporation, a Delaware corporation, as the
general partner of the Partnership the (“General Partner”), and the limited
partners of the Partnership. The limited partners of the Partnership shall be
referred to herein as “Limited Partners” with the General Partner and the
Limited Partners hereinafter referred to as the “Partners”.




WHEREAS,
it is desired that the Agreement be amended to provide for the matters set forth
herein;




NOW,
THEREFORE, the is amended as follows:




1.           Amendment.




(a)           The
Agreement is amended hereby so that the name of the Partnership is changed from
“RFMC Willowbridge Fund, L.P.” to “RFMC Tactical Advisors Fund, LP” and every
reference in the Agreement to “RFMC Willowbridge Fund, L.P.” shall be replaced
by the words “RFMC Tactical Advisors Fund, LP”




2.           Effectiveness.




This
Amendment shall be effective as of the date hereof.




3.           Governing
Law.




The
parties agree that this Amendment shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware.




4.           Amendment.




On and
after the date hereof, any reference in the Agreement to “this Agreement,” or
words of like import, shall mean the Agreement as amended hereby.




IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, this Fourth Amendment to Amended and Restated Limited
Partnership Agreement has been executed for and on behalf of the undersigned as
of the day and year first above written.









General
Partner




RUVANE
FUND MANAGEMENT CORPORATION











By:  ___________________________________


Robert L.
Lerner


President
Case 3:20-cv-04698-TKW-HTC Document 1-12 Filed 03/11/20 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:20-cv-04698-TKW-HTC Document 1-12 Filed 03/11/20 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:20-cv-04698-TKW-HTC Document 1-12 Filed 03/11/20 Page 3 of 3
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, Corbin R. Davis, 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.

_________________________________________ Clerk April 29, 2013

h0422 

# Order

April 29, 2013

146020

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146020

COA: 311536

Wayne CC: 11

- 002149

- 01

- FC

CALVIN EUNICE MARSHALL,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 29, 2012

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### The State ex rel. Russell, Appellant, *v.*Restaurant Equippers, Inc., Appellee; Industrial Commission of Ohio et al., Appellees.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Russell v. Restaurant Equippers, Inc.*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 547.]

(No. 98A102

Submitted September 15, 1998

Decided November 10, 1998.)

*Barkan & Neff, L.P.A.,*and *Robert E. DeRose,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *Cordelia A. Glenn,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellees Industrial Commission et al.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
#### § 210.25 Suspension, termination and grant closeout procedures.

Whenever it is determined that a State agency has materially failed to comply with the provisions of this part, or with FNS guidelines and instructions, FNS may suspend or terminate the Program in whole, or in part, or take any other action as may be available and appropriate. A State agency may also terminate the Program by mutual agreement with FNS. FNS and the State agency shall comply with the provisions of 2 CFR part 200, subpart D and USDA implementing regulations 2 CFR part 400 and part 415 concerning grant suspension, termination and closeout procedures. Furthermore, the State agency shall apply these provisions, as applicable, to suspension or termination of the Program in school food authorities.

[53 FR 29147, Aug. 2, 1988. Redesignated at 56 FR 32948, July 17, 1991, and amended at 71 FR 39516, July 13, 2006; 81 FR 66488, 66490, Sept. 28, 2016]
Exhibit 13.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

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



In connection with the Annual Report of China Natural Resources, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I,Ma Sin Ling, Chief Financial 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:

(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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Ma Sin Ling

Ma Sin Ling

Chief Financial Officer

April 29, 2014

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 29.2261 Crude.

A subdegree of maturity. Crude leaves are usually hard and slick as a result of extreme immaturity. A similar condition may result from fire-kill, sunburn, or sunscald. Any leaf which is crude to the extent of 20 percent or more of its surface may be described as crude. (See Rule 19, § 29.2410.)
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2141 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Head Start teachers 

the same above-the-line deduction for supplies as is allowed to elementary 

and secondary school teachers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 23, 2013 

Mrs. BEATTY (for herself, Mr. VARGAS, Ms. NORTON, and Mr. POLIS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways 

and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Head 

Start teachers the same above-the-line deduction for supplies as is allowed to elementary and secondary school 

teachers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. HEAD START TEACHERS ALLOWED ABOVE-THE4 LINE DEDUCTION FOR SUPPLIES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 62(d) of 

6 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining eligible edu7 cator) is amended by adding at the end the following new 

8 subparagraph: 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2141 IH

1 ‘‘(C) HEAD START TEACHERS.—The term 

2 ‘eligible educator’ includes, with respect to any 

3 taxable year, an individual who is a teacher or 

4 aide under a Head Start program operating 

5 under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et 

6 seq.) for at least 700 hours during a school 

7 year.’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years ending after 

10 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### ABBE, Appellant, v. CORBETT et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 17, 1906.)

Action by Richard F. Abbe against Charles H. Corbett, Jr., and another.

No opinion. The undisputed evidence established a surrender of the lease. Summary proceedings therefore lay, and it was error to dismiss. The final order of the Municipal Court dismissing the proceeding is therefore reversed, and a new trial ordered; costs to abide the event.
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                               BERNARD CHAUS, INC.
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                  In connection with the Annual Report of Bernard Chaus, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

o        the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.

September 27, 2004
                                                  /s/ Barton Heminover
                                                  --------------------
                                                  Barton Heminover
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
```
§ 28.901 Definitions. When used in the regulations in this subpart: ( a ) *Act* means the United States Cotton Standards Act of 1923, as amended (7 U.S.C. 51-65) and the Cotton Statistics and Estimates Act of 1927 (7 U.S.C. 471-476), unless otherwise noted.
( b ) *Service* means the Agricultural Marketing Service of the United States Department of Agriculture.
( c ) *Administrator* means the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service, or any officer or employee of the Service to whom authority has heretofore been delegated, or to whom authority may hereafter be delegated to act for the Administrator.
( d ) *Division* means the Cotton Division of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
( e ) *Director* means the Director of the Cotton Division, or any officer or employee of the Division to whom authority has heretofore been delegated or to whom authority may hereafter be delegated, to act for the Director.
( f ) *Producer* means any individual, partnership, corporation, association, trust, estate, or other legal entity, a State or political subdivision thereof, or any agency of such State or political subdivision producing American Upland or American Pima cotton in the capacity of landowner, landlord, tenant, or sharecropper.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JUDY M LEONARD,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:03-cv-00003-MP-AK

ATTORNEY GENERAL

ALBERTO GONZALES,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 33, Report and Recommendations of the

Magistrate Judge, recommending that the defendant’s Motion for Summary 

Judgment be granted and this cause be dismissed with prejudice. The plaintiff filed objections,

doc. 34, to which the defendant responded, doc. 35. Having reviewed these pleadings, the Court

agrees with the Magistrate Judge that plaintiff did not file suit within 90 days of her final agency

decision as required and has not offered any argument persuading the Court that the time limit

should be tolled. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and

incorporated herein.

2. This action is DISMISSED, and the clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of September, 2006

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:03-cv-00003-MP-AK Document 36 Filed 09/06/06 Page 1 of 1
Proposed Gulf Coast Regional Spaceport Fact Sheet 

The proposed action, as the 

Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) Office of 

Commercial Space 

Transportation (AST) currently 

understands it, is for the FAA 

to issue a launch site operator 

license to the Gulf Coast 

Regional Spaceport 

Development Corporation 

(GCRSDC) to support the 

launch of suborbital rockets. 

The GCRSDC has indicated 

that its preferred location for 

the commercial launch site 

would be in Brazoria County, 

Texas, south of Big Slough 

Road. As part of the proposed 

action, the GCRSDC proposes 

to construct a 0.5-mile access 

road and a 40 foot by 40 foot 

launch pad (see map right). 

The GCRSDC proposes that the launch site would support up to eight 

launches per year of suborbital rockets. The duration of the proposed 

launches would be 15 minutes or less. The proposed site could also be used 

to conduct amateur launches from the designated ‘Rocket Park’ area shown 

above. Amateur launches would not

 

 be licensed or permitted by the FAA. A 

launch site operator license would be valid for five years from the date of 

issuance unless surrendered, suspended, or revoked before the expiration of 

the term and is renewable upon application by the licensee. Issuing a 

license is considered a major Federal action and is subject to environmental 

review as required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). 

Preferred Location of the 

Proposed Gulf Coast Regional Spaceport
Additional Information & How to Submit Comments 

For More Information 

• Visit the FAA-AST website at 

http://ast.faa.gov 

• Request that the FAA provide 

you with a copy of the 

Executive Summary or Draft 

EA, when available, at the 

registration table tonight or 

by one of the methods 

described to the left 

• Obtain a copy of the Draft EA, 

once published, on the FAA’s 

website or at local libraries 

To Submit Comments 

Oral and written comments can be 

submitted at the meeting tonight 

Written comments can be mailed to: 

 Ms. Stacey M. Zee 

 FAA Environmental Specialist 

 Gulf Coast Regional Spaceport EA 

 c/o ICF International 

 9300 Lee Highway 

 Fairfax, VA 22031 

Fax to (703) 934-3951 

 

E-mail to GCRSpaceportEA@icfi.com 

If the FAA issues a launch site operator 

license, any major changes in operations or 

infrastructure would require a license 

modification, which would be subject to the 

FAA’s licensing process, and therefore subject 

to an environmental determination. 

A launch site operator license does not 

authorize launches of specific rockets, but 

allows the licensee to offer a site from which 

launches could occur. Private non-amateur 

launch operators would be required to obtain 

a launch license before launching their rocket 

from a licensed site. 

The issuance of a launch license is considered 

a major Federal action, and therefore, would 

be subject to the NEPA process. An example 

of a launch of a representative rocket being 

considered under the proposed action is 

shown left. Source: www.wff.nasa.gov
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2251 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 118 South Mill Street, 

in Fergus Falls, Minnesota, as the ‘‘Edward J. Devitt United States 

Courthouse’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 4, 2013 

Mr. PETERSON (for himself, Mr. WALZ, Mr. KLINE, Mr. PAULSEN, Ms. 

MCCOLLUM, Mr. ELLISON, Mrs. BACHMANN, and Mr. NOLAN) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 118 

South Mill Street, in Fergus Falls, Minnesota, as the 

‘‘Edward J. Devitt United States Courthouse’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The United States courthouse located at 118 South 

5 Mill Street, in Fergus Falls, Minnesota, shall be known 

6 and designated as the ‘‘Edward J. Devitt United States 

7 Courthouse’’. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2251 IH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

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

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

4 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed 

5 to be a reference to the ‘‘Edward J. Devitt United States 

6 Courthouse’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS