alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas September 12, 2022 No. 04-22-00529-CR Jenelius O. CREW , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR12785 Honorable Stephanie R. Boyd, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R In accordance with a plea bargain, Jeneluis O. Crew pled nolo contendere to deadly conduct in exchange for deferred adjudication community supervision. The trial court subsequently adjudicated Crew guilty and sentenced him. Crew now seeks to appeal. However, the clerk’s record contains a trial court certification signed on July 15, 2022 stating, “this criminal case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” Because this is an appeal from a proceeding on the motion to adjudicate guilt, the trial court’s certification of defendant’s right of appeal is defective. Hargesheimer v. State , 182 S.W.3d 906, 913 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We therefore ORDER the trial court to amend the certification and the district clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing the amended certification by October 12, 2022. T EX . R. A PP . P. 37.2; Hargesheimer , 182 S.W.3d at 913.

_________________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 12th day of September, 2022.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
#### Philips *v.*Philips.

No. 8483.

February 17, 1932.

Per Curiam.

This case is controlled by the ruling next preceding.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, J., who dissents.*
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

 

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

 

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

 

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ebix, Inc. (the“Company”) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Richard J. Baum, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| By:                     | /s/ Richard J. Baum |   |
|-------------------------|---------------------|--------|
|                    |                |
| Name:                   | Richard J. Baum     |   |
|                    |                |
| Chief Financial Officer |                |
|                    |                |
| November 15, 2004  |                |
|                         |                     |        |  |

 

1

----
Editorial Note on Part 868
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 868 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 868.5350 Nasal oxygen catheter. ( a ) *Identification.* A nasal oxygen catheter is a device intended to be inserted through a patient's nostril to administer oxygen.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 868.9.
[47 FR 31142, July 16, 1982, as amended at 59 FR 63007, Dec. 7, 1994; 66 FR 38794, July 25, 2001]
§ 876.5365 Esophageal dilator. ( a ) *Identification.* An esophageal dilator is a device that consists of a cylindrical instrument that may be hollow and weighted with mercury or a metal olive-shaped weight that slides on a guide, such as a string or wire and is used to dilate a stricture of the esophagus. This generic type of device includes esophageal or gastrointestinal bougies and the esophageal dilator (metal olive).
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 876.9.
[48 FR 53023, Nov. 23, 1983, as amended at 84 FR 71814, Dec. 30, 2019]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         413,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,685,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,750,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,068,000
<PP&E>                                       1,457,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,009,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,848,000
<BONDS>                                        476,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    19,345,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (12,660,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,009,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,653,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,181,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,626,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              50,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,204,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,208,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  55,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,153,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.21)
        

</TABLE>
#### EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Appellee, v. OCEAN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Appellant. Patricia A. DIXON, Appellant, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, Appellee, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Equal Employment Advisory Council, Amici Curiae.

Nos. 85-1798, 85-2033.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

July 9, 1986.

ORDER

The appellant’s petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc in case No. 85-1798 were submitted to this Court. In a requested poll of the Court, Judges Russell, Widener, Phillips, Murna-ghan, Ervin, Chapman and Wilkinson voted to rehear No. 85-1798 in banc; and Chief Judge Winter, Judges Hall and Sprouse voted against rehearing the case in banc. A majority of judges having voted to grant rehearing in banc,

IT IS ORDERED that rehearing in banc is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that No. 85-1798 shall be calendared for argument at the October session of Court.

In No. 85-2033, Judge Widener and Judge Hall voted to deny the EEOC’s motion for leave to intervene and file a petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc. Judge Haynsworth voted to grant the motion for leave to intervene, but voted to deny the petition for rehearing.

Entered at the direction of Judge Hall.
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

       In connection with the quarterly report of InZon Corporation
(formerly W-J International, Ltd.) ("Company") on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission ("Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities
and on the dated indicated below, hereby certify pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that
to their 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.


Dated: May 21, 2006             By: /s/ David F. Levy
                                    ------------------
		 		    	David F. Levy, President
                                        Principal Executive Officer


Dated: May 21, 2006              By: /s/ Richard Dea
                                     ----------------
		 		    	Richard Dea, Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Advanced Marketing
Services, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended September 28, 2002, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Edward J. Leonard, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer and Secretary of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date: February 11, 2003            /s/ Edward J. Leonard
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Name:  Edward J. Leonard
                                   Title: Executive Vice President,
                                          Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
**Exhibit31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Richard J.Baum, certify that:

 

1. I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ebix, Inc.;

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  | November 15, 2004  | /s/ Richard J. Baum |   |
|--------|-------------------------|---------------------|--------|
|   | Richard J. Baum         |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

1

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7559** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.

KENYATTA SYKES , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Greenville

. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. ( 4:09

- cr
- 00015

- F

- 1 )

Submitted : January 15, 2015 Decided: January 21, 2015

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER , Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Kenyatta Sykes , Appellant Pro Se. S. Katherine Burnette , Joshua Bryan Royster , OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY , Stephen Aubrey West , Assistant United States Attor ney, Raleigh , North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Kenyatta Sykes appe als from the district court’s
October 6, 2014 orders denying his letter motions and motions

for reconsiderat ion and for other relief and its October 7, 2014
order adjudicating his motion to amend a prior reconsideratio n
motion and for other relief. On appeal, we confine our review
to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R.
34(b). Because Sykes ’ informal brief does not challenge the
basis for the district court’s disposition s , Sykes has forfeited
appellate review of the court’s order s . * Accordingly, we affirm

the district court’s orders . We dispense with oral argument

because the facts an d legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* In his informal brief, Sykes challenges the district court’s September 11, 2014 order denying his motion for reduction of sentence. To the extent Sykes seeks appellate review of that order, we may not review it because Sykes did not designat e the order as an order for which he sought appellate review in his notice of appeal. See Jackson v. Lightsey ,

___ F.3d ___, No. 13

- 7291, s lip op. at 10

- 14 (4th Cir. Dec. 18, 2014).
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Solely in connection withthe filing of the Annual Report of Retractable Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed withthe United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),the undersigned Thomas J. Shaw, Chief Executive Officer, and Douglas W. Cowan,Chief Financial Officer, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities 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.

 
| Date:     March 31,  2009 |                      |
|---------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|
|                                                    |                      |
|                                                    |                      |
|                                                    | /s/  Thomas J. Shaw       |
|                                                    | THOMAS  J. SHAW           |
|                                                    | PRESIDENT,  CHAIRMAN, AND |
|                                                    | CHIEF  EXECUTIVE OFFICER  |
|                                                    |                      |
|                                                    |                      |
|                                                    | /s/  Douglas W. Cowan     |
|                                                    | DOUGLAS  W. COWAN         |
|                                                    | VICE  PRESIDENT AND       |
|                                                    | CHIEF  FINANCIAL OFFICER  |
# C_2015429EN.01002201.xml

| 21.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 429/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 429/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 October 2015 — Roca Sanitario v OHIM — Villeroy & Boch (Single control handle faucet)

(Case T-334/14) (1)

1

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a single control handle faucet - Earlier Community design - Ground for invalidity - Individual character - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - No scope for innovation - Different Overall impression - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))

(2015/C 429/28)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Roca Sanitario, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: R. Guerras Mazón, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Villeroy & Boch AG (Mettlach, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 February 2014 (Case R 812/2012-3), concerning invalidity proceedings between Villeroy & Boch AG and Roca Sanitario, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Roca Sanitario, SA, to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Roca Sanitario, SA, to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.

1

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50398 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus LUIS JUAREZ-DURAN, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. MO-97-CR-20-ALL

- - - - - - - - - - January 5, 1999 Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Luis Juarez-Duran has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Juarez-Duran has filed a response. Our independent review of the brief, the record, and Juarez-Duran’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,274,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,534,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    75,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,757,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,674,000
<PP&E>                                       1,822,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 787,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,650,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,040,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    19,351,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     128,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,650,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,288,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,448,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               914,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,000 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,000 
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,000 
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,000 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 73
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 73 appear at 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001.

§ 73.450 Riboflavin. ( a ) *Identity.* ( 1 ) The color additive riboflavin is the riboflavin defined in the Food Chemicals Codex, 3d Ed. (1981), pp. 262-263, which is incorporated by reference. Copies may be obtained from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( 2 ) Color additive mixtures made with riboflavin may contain as diluents only those substances listed in this subpart as safe and suitable for use in color additive mixtures for coloring foods.
( b ) *Specifications.* Riboflavin shall meet the specifications given in the Food Chemicals Codex, 3d Ed. (1981), which is incorporated by reference. The availability of this incorporation by reference is given in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( c ) *Uses and restrictions.* Riboflavin may be safely used for the coloring of foods generally, in amounts consistent with good manufacturing practice; except that it may not be used to color foods for which standards of identity have been promulgated under section 401 of the act, unless the use of added color is authorized by such standards.
( d ) *Labeling.* The label of the color additive shall conform to the requirements of § 70.25 of this chapter.
( e ) *Exemption from certification.* Certification of this color additive is not necessary for the protection of the public health, and therefore batches thereof are exempt from the certification requirements of section 721(c) of the Act.
[42 FR 15643, Mar. 22, 1977, as amended at 47 FR 947, Jan. 8, 1982; 49 FR 10089, Mar. 19, 1984]