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

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-24-00248-CR

Serena JOSEPH,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2023CR11216

Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 5, 2024

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

On March 19, 2024, the trial court filed an order for evaluation of competency, which is 

not an appealable judgment. See Sanchez v. State, No. 04-18-00281-CR, 2018 WL 2418432, at 

*1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 30, 2018, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) 

(citing Jackson v. State, No. 01-13-00561-CR, 2014 WL 123838, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st 

Dist.] Jan. 14, 2014, no pet.); Woods v. State, 108 S.W.3d 314, 316 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); 

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 46B.011). On April 1, 2024, Appellant filed a notice of appeal.
04-24-00248-CR

- 2 -

On April 16, 2024, we ordered Appellant to show cause as to why this court should not 

dismiss for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). 

Appellant did not respond. Because the order for evaluation of competency is not an 

appealable order, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See id.; Sanchez, 2018 WL 

2418432, at *1. 

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                  MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          2,482,000
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 105,780,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    2,020,000
<INVENTORY>                                    60,443,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              181,393,000
<PP&E>                                        198,983,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 27,743,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                667,736,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          95,499,000
<BONDS>                                       180,000,000
<COMMON>                                          489,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                    19,997,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    218,718,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  667,736,000
<SALES>                                       805,274,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              805,274,000
<CGS>                                         740,061,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 740,061,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               98,178,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             31,332,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (64,070,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (17,036,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (47,034,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    117,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 (938,000)
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (49,670,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (1.24)


</TABLE>
#### § 355.10 Permission to engage in business concerning nonlisted terrestrial plants.

The Secretary hereby grants permission for any person engaged in business as an importer, exporter, or reexporter of terrestrial plants, other than terrestrial plants listed in 50 CFR 17.12 or 23.23, to engage in such business without a protected plant permit issued under § 355.11.

[49 FR 42912, Oct. 25, 1984, as amended at 70 FR 57995, Oct. 5, 2005]
###### Editorial Note on Part 3400

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3400 appear at 76 FR 4806, Jan. 27, 2011.

#### § 3400.21 Scientific peer review for research activities.

Scientific peer review is an evaluation of a proposed project for technical quality and relevance to regional or national goals performed by experts with the scientific knowledge and technical skills to conduct the proposed research work. Peer reviewers may be selected from an applicant organization or from outside the organization, but shall not include principals, collaborators or others involved in the preparation of the application under review.
§ 319.8-16 Importation into United States of cotton and covers exported therefrom. ( a ) Cotton and covers grown, produced, or handled in the United States and exported therefrom, and in the original bales or other containers in which such material was exported therefrom, may be imported into the United States at any port under permit, without vacuum fumigation or other treatment or restriction as to utilization, upon compliance with §§ 319.8-2, 319.8-4, and § 319.8-5, and upon the submission of evidence satisfactory to the inspector that such material was grown, produced, or handled in the United States and does not constitute a risk of introducing the pink bollworm into the United States.
( b ) Cotton and covers of foreign origin imported into the United States in accordance with this subpart and exported therefrom, when in the original bales or other original containers, may be reimported into the United States under the conditions specified in paragraph (a) of this section.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION
 CERTIFICATION OF W. RANDALL FOWLER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
OF EPE HOLDINGS, LLC, THE GENERAL PARTNER OF
ENTERPRISE GP HOLDINGS L.P.
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Registrant.
 /s/ W. Randall FowlerName:
    
    W. Randall FowlerTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer of EPE Holdings, LLCon behalf of Enterprise GP Holdings L.P.Date:
    
    May 9, 2006
#### §§ 319.37-12-319.37-19 [Reserved]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF MARK VII, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 28,
1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                             414
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,135
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,693
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                70,697
<PP&E>                                           8,963
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,665
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  81,602
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           53,153
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           490
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,334
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    81,602
<SALES>                                        408,486
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               408,486
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  400,887
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   682
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 215
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,383
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,101
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,282
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,282
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Joann Gursey, Respondent, v. Bruce Gursey, Appellant.

Motion by the appellant husband to stay an order of the Family Court, Queens County, made December 9, 1966, pending appeal therefrom denied. Examination of a transcript of the stenographic minutes of the hearing held on said date and examination of a transcript of the court’s docket as furnished by the Clerk disclose that in fact no order of disposition was made by the court on December 9, 1966. It appears that the husband had made a motion to modify an existing support order. The order which was made on December 9, 1966 — and from which the husband seeks to appeal — merely refers that motion to another part of the Family Court for disposition at a later date and, in effect, by specifically continuing the existing order, refused to stay its operation pending the disposition of the motion; the merits of the motion, however, were not considered. Hence the order of December 9, 1966 is not an order of disposition from which an appeal will lie and, under the circumstances, the present motion in this court for a stay must be denied. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
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

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, Intertek USA, Inc., 1941 Freeman Ave., Suite A, Signal Hill, CA 90755, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products, for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                         *http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​.*

# DATES:

                        The accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective                               ( print page 70936)                            on July 21, 2010. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for July 2013.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony Malana, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

Dated: November 8, 2010.

Ira S. Reese,

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.

[FR Doc. 2010-29183 Filed 11-18-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
#### HAYDEL, Respondent, v. GOULD, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 8, 1906.)

Action by Abner J. Haydel against Howard Gould.

No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
#### John Charles THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. Arthur J. SILLS, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 454-69.

United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

June 5, 1969.

John Charles Thomas, pro se.

*980Eugene T. Urbaniak, Deputy Atty. Gen., for Arthur J. Sills, Atty. Gen.

MEMORANDUM and ORDER

AUGELLI, Chief Judge:

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, was given leave to proceed in forma pauperis in a civil rights action against defendant, Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey.

Plaintiff alleges he was deprived of his federal constitutional rights by the wrongful conduct of the Prosecutor of Essex County, and that by reason thereof he is entitled to maintain this action for money damages under the Civil Rights Act. The claim for damages ($10,000,000.00) is asserted, however, not against the alleged wrongdoer, but against the Attorney General, the named defendant herein. The gist of plaintiff’s complaint is that he pleaded guilty to an “alleged Essex County Grand Jury Indictment”; that he was prosecuted and sentenced, not upon an indictment or “true bill” returned by the Essex County Grand Jury, but on “a mere complaint, or at best, a prosecutor’s bill of indictment”; that the Prosecutor, the court, and the trial attorney, all knew that a “true bill” was nonexistent; that the proceedings against him, in the absence of a “true bill” constituted a deprivation of his civil rights; and that plaintiff was the victim of a “criminal conspiracy” in which the County Prosecutor was the “Key Figure”.

It is claimed that the State of New Jersey, through its Attorney General, must bear full responsibility for the criminal acts committed by county prosecutors against citizens who are accused of crime, and that for the “criminal harm” done by the Prosecutor of Essex County to plaintiff, the Attorney General should respond in damages to the extent heretofore indicated.

The matter is presently before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss the action on the ground that the complaint fails to state a claim against the defendant upon which relief may be granted. The action will be dismissed. Bauers v. Heisel, 361 F.2d 581 (3 Cir. 1966).

The complaint, on its face, is patently frivolous and devoid of merit. Leave to file in forma pauperis in this ease was improvidently granted. None of the allegations of the complaint connect the defendant, directly or indirectly, with any alleged acts of wrongdoing, nor does the purely conclusory allegation of a conspiracy involve said defendant. The Attorney General is not a member of the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office and by no stretch of the imagination is he liable to respond in damages for the alleged tortious conduct set forth in plaintiff’s complaint.

Since it so clearly appears from the complaint that none of the matters alleged therein in any way involve or involved conduct on the part of defendant, the motion to dismiss the action will be granted, without costs, and it is so

Ordered, this 5th day of June, 1969.
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**Certification
      of Principal** **Financial
      Officer**


**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 Quarterly Report of SRKP 3, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony C.
      Pintsopoulos, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.





/s/
                Anthony C. PintsopoulosAnthony
                C. PintsopoulosPrincipal
                Financial OfficerMay
                6, 2008
Editorial Note on Part 3406
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3406 appear at 76 FR 4809, Jan. 27, 2011.

§ 3406.6 USDA agency cooperator requirement. ( a ) Each application must provide documentation that at least one USDA agency or office has agreed to cooperate with the applicant institution on the proposed project. The documentation should describe the expected benefits of the partnership venture for the USDA agency and for the 1890 Institution, and describe the partnership effort between USDA and the 1890 Institution in regard to the proposed project. Such USDA agency cooperation may include, but is not limited to, assisting the applicant institution with proposal development, identifying possible sources of matching funds, securing resources, implementing funded projects, providing technical assistance and expertise throughout the life of the project, participating in project evaluation, and disseminating project results.
( b ) The designated NIFA agency contact can provide suggestions to institutions seeking to secure a USDA agency cooperator on a particular proposal.
( c ) USDA 1890 Liaison Officers, and other USDA employees serving on the campuses of the 1890 colleges and universities, may assist with proposal development and project execution to satisfy the cooperator requirement, in whole or in part, but may not serve as project directors or principal investigators.
( d ) Any USDA office responsible for administering a competitive or formula grants program specifically targeted to 1890 Institutions may not be a cooperator for this program.
#### §§ 3555.110-3555.149 [Reserved]
#### § 3419.7 Reporting of matching funds.

Institutions will report all capacity matching funds expended annually using Standard Form (SF) 425, in accordance with 7 CFR 3430.56(a).

[83 FR 21850, May 11, 2018]
##### 



EXHIBIT 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ Revis L. Stephenson IIIRevis L. Stephenson IIIChief Executive Officer/s/ Richard PetersonRichard PetersonVice President of Accounting and
Finance and Chief Financial Officer
#### § 33.50 Apples for processing.

The terms “apples for processing” as used in § 33.12 of this part apply only and is restricted to packages of apples which were originally packaged for processing and marked “Cannery” as required by § 33.12(c) of this part. Packages of apples not so originally packaged and marked are not eligible for certification as “apples for processing” for purposes of this part.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PANAMA CITY DIVISION 

IN THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH 

OF 4068 FAIRBANKS DRIVE, 

CHIPLEY, FLORIDA 32428 

Case No. 5:20-mj-44-MJF 

Filed Under Seal 

MOTION REQUESTING AN ORDER SEALING THE 

SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT, APPLICATION AND ALL 

RELATED DOCUMENTS 

The United States of America requests this Court to issue an Order 

sealing the SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT, APPLICATION AND 

ALL RELATED DOCUMENTS in this case, and in support of this motion 

states as follows: 

 1. The Search Warrant, Application and all related documents 

concern an ongoing criminal investigation and the public revelation of the 

documents could severely hamper law enforcement’s ability to continue its 

investigation. 

 2. The United States further moves the Court that the Search 

Warrant, Application and all related documents in this case shall remain 

sealed until May 6, 2021, unless otherwise extended by the Court upon the 

government’s motion. The Clerk of the Court, however, shall provide one 

Case 5:20-mj-00044-MJF Document 4 Filed 05/06/20 Page 1 of 2
certified copy of the Search Warrant, application and all related documents to 

the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida. 

 LAWRENCE KEEFE 

 United States Attorney 

 __s//Michelle Daffin___________ 

Michelle Daffin 

Assistant United States Attorney 

Florida Bar No. 0640761 

1001 East Business Hwy 98, Ste 2 

Panama City, FL 32401 

(850) 767-5006 

michelle.daffin@usdoj.gov 

ORDER 

The government’s motion is granted. 

 DONE AND ORDERED this ______ day of May, 2020. 

 

Case 5:20-mj-00044-MJF Document 4 Filed 05/06/20 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Solera
Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned chief executive officer and chief
financial officer of the Company, certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 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/ Tony Aquila         |  |  |  | /s/ Dudley Mendenhall  
|Tony Aquila             |  |  |  | Dudley Mendenhall      
|Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
|                        |  | 
|Date: May 8, 2009       |  |  |  | Date: May 8, 2009