alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
617 P.2d 530

#### The STATE of Arizona, Petitioner, v. The Honorable J. Richard HANNAH, Judge of the Superior Court, Division Twelve, in and for the County of Pima, State of Arizona, Respondent, and O’Neal Harris, Real Party In Interest.

No. 2 CA-CIV 3555.

Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 2.

March 20, 1980.

Rehearing Denied April 23, 1980.

Review Granted May 13, 1980.

Affirmed, 126 Ariz. 575, 617 P.2d 527.

Stephen D. Neely, Pima County Atty., by D. Jesse Smith, Deputy County Atty., Tucson, for petitioner.

Armand Sálese, Tucson, for real party in interest.

OPINION

HOWARD, Judge.

The state brought this special action to challenge the respondent court’s dismissal of an allegation of prior convictions filed against the real party in interest. We believe the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction and, because the state has no adequate remedy by appeal, we assume jurisdiction and grant relief.

The real party in interest is charged in the instant case with three Class 2 felonies, all alleged to have been committed on August 10, 1979. The prior convictions which the county attorney alleged in this case were forgery convictions entered on October 22, 1979 for crimes which occurred on November 2 and 3, 1978.

A.R.S. Sec. 13-604(B) provides:

> “. .. a person who is at least eighteen years of age or who has been tried as an adult and who stands convicted of a class 2 or 3 felony, whether a completed or preparatory offense and who has previously been convicted of any felony shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than the sentence and not more than three times the sentence authorized by § 13-701 for the offense for which the person currently stands convicted, ...”

The foregoing section of the Code differs from that involved in *State v. Lopez,*120 Ariz. 607, 587 P.2d 1184 (1978) and there is no requirement as far as Class 2 or 3 felonies are concerned that the prior conviction must have occurred prior to the date of the present offense. This conclusion is bolstered not only by the language of A.R.S. Sec. 13-604(B) but also by the language of A.R.S. Sec. 13-604(H) which states:

> “Convictions for two or more offenses not committed on the same occasion but consolidated for trial purposes, may, at the discretion of the state, be counted as prior convictions for purposes of this section . . . . ”

*579A.R.S. Sec. 13-604(A) which was relied on by the trial court and the real party in interest refers only to Class 4, 5, and 6 felonies which are less serious in nature.

The order of the respondent court dismissing the allegation of the prior offenses is vacated.

HATHAWAY, C. J., and RICHMOND, J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             923
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,091
<ALLOWANCES>                                       242
<INVENTORY>                                      6,288
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,775
<PP&E>                                           5,337
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,305
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,282
<BONDS>                                          2,545
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              459
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            39
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,848
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,106
<SALES>                                         18,713
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,713
<CGS>                                           13,061
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,061
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    26
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 344
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,128)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        37
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,165)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,165)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.10)
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 878
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 878 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 878.4520 Polytetrafluoroethylene injectable. ( a ) *Identification.* Polytetrafluoroethylene injectable is an injectable paste prosthetic device composed of polytetrafluoroethylene intended to be used to augment or reconstruct a vocal cord.
( b ) *Classification.* Class III.
( c ) *Date PMA or notice of completion of a PDP is required.* As of May 28, 1976, an approval under section 515 of the act is required before this device may be commercially distributed. See § 878.3.
EXHIBIT
        32.2
 
 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 of Fonix Corporation on Form 10-Q for
        the
        period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
        Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roger D. Dudley, Chief
        Financial Officer 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:
 
 (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/
                  ROGER D. DUDLEY**Roger
                  D. DudleyChief
                  Financial Officer
 Dated
        May
        12, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,801
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   73,789
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     44,667
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               122,642
<PP&E>                                         123,599
<DEPRECIATION>                                (54,937)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 271,975
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,303
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        24,337
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,368
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   271,975
<SALES>                                         91,756
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                91,756
<CGS>                                           66,621
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   86,515
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,157
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,084
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,079
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,079
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,079
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15
        

</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

July 29, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00442

- CV

ECO

- STIM ENERGY SOLUTION, INC.,

Appellant

v.

VP SALES & COMPANY, L.P.,

Appellee

From the 79th Judicial District Court, Jim Wells County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18

- 09

- 58741

- CV Honorable Richard C. Terrell, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant has filed proof it has paid the fees due to the Jim Wells County District Clerk for preparation and filing of the clerk’s record. We therefore order R. David Guerrero to file the clerk’s record in this appeal by August 19, 2019

.

_________________________________ Luz El ena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 29th day of July, 2019

.

___________________________________ K EITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
§ 1.194-3 Definitions. ( a ) *Qualified timber property.* The term *qualified timber property* means property located in the United States which will contain trees in significant commercial quantities. The property may be a woodlot or other site but must consist of at least one acre which is planted with tree seedlings in the manner normally used in forestation or reforestation. The property must be held by the taxpayer for the growing and cutting of timber which will either be sold for use in, or used by the taxpayer in, the commercial production of timber products. A taxpayer does not have to own the property in order to be eligible to elect to amortize costs attributable to it under section 194. Thus, a taxpayer may elect to amortize qualifying reforestation expenditures incurred by such taxpayer on leased qualified timber property. Qualified timber property does not include property on which the taxpayer has planted shelter belts (for which current deductions are allowed under section 175) or ornamental trees, such as Christmas trees.
( b ) *Amortizable basis.* The term *amortizable basis* means that portion of the basis of qualified timber property which is attributable to reforestation expenditures.
( c ) *Reforestation expenditures* — ( 1 ) *In general.* The term *reforestation expenditures* means direct costs incurred to plant or seed for forestation or reforestation purposes. Qualifying expenditures include amounts spent for site preparation, seed or seedlings, and labor and tool costs, including depreciation on equipment used in planting or seeding. Only those costs which must be capitalized and are included in the adjusted basis of the property qualify as reforestation expenditures. Costs which are currently deductible do not qualify.
( 2 ) *Cost-sharing programs.* Any expenditures for which the taxpayer has been reimbursed under any governmental reforestation cost-sharing program do not qualify as reforestation expenditures unless the amounts reimbursed have been included in the gross income of the taxpayer.
( d ) *Definitions of controlled group of corporations and component member of controlled group.* For purposes of section 194, the terms *controlled group of corporations* and *component member* of a controlled group of corporations shall have the same meaning assigned to those terms in section 1563 (a) and (b), except that the phrase “more than 50 percent” shall be substituted for the phrase “at least 80 percent” each place it appears in section 1563(a)(1).
[T.D. 7927, 48 FR 55850, Dec. 16, 1983]
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-71,353]

Pursuant to Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on June 23, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers of Albion Associates, Inc., High Point, North Carolina.

The petitioning group of workers is covered by an earlier petition TA-W-71,121 filed on June 10, 2009 that is the subject of an ongoing investigation for which a determination has not yet been issued. Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC,  this 17th day of July 2009.

Elliott S. Kushner,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-18175 Filed 7-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         Sep-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            Oct-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              Mar-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                          1,064
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  13,279
<ALLOWANCES>                                      241
<INVENTORY>                                    13,998
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               30,575
<PP&E>                                         24,742
<DEPRECIATION>                                  6,666
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 55,736
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          11,641
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          180
<OTHER-SE>                                     18,498
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   55,736
<SALES>                                        32,835
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               32,835
<CGS>                                          23,375
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  28,516
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  398
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                806
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 3,115
<INCOME-TAX>                                    1,212
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             1,942
<DISCONTINUED>                                   (160)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    1,782
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.10
        



</TABLE>
Opinion issued April 18, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-22-00888-CV

———————————

CHARLES NELSON, Appellant

V.

JOSH VATH AND JANET VATH, Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. CV-0087557

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed October 25, 2022. Appellant has

not paid for the clerk’s record or the required filing fee and has not established 

indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 20.1 (indigence), 

37.3(b) (allowing dismissal of appeal if no clerk’s record filed due to appellant’s 
2

fault); see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041; 

Order Regarding Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts 

of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket 

No. 15-9158. Appellant failed to respond to our notices of December 22, 2022 (past 

due filing fee) and December 27, 2022 (non-payment for the clerk’s record), that, 

should appellant not pay the fee for the clerk’s record or the filing fee or establish 

indigence, this appeal was subject to dismissal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5 (allowing 

enforcement of rule), 37.3(b) (allowing dismissal of appeal if no clerk’s record filed 

due to appellant’s fault), 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case). Appellant 

has not responded to this Court’s notices.

We dismiss the appeal. We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Kelly and Goodman.
#### § 1.41-1 Credit for increasing research activities.

(a) *Amount of credit.* The amount of a taxpayer's credit is determined under section 41(a). For taxable years beginning after June 30, 1996, and at the election of the taxpayer, the portion of the credit determined under section 41(a)(1) may be calculated using the alternative incremental credit set forth in section 41(c)(4). For taxable years ending after December 31, 2006, and at the election of the taxpayer, the portion of the credit determined under section 41(a)(1) may be calculated using either the alternative incremental credit set forth in section 41(c)(4), or the alternative simplified credit set forth in section 41(c)(5).

(b) *Introduction to regulations under section 41.*

(1) Sections 1.41-2 through 1.41-8 and 1.41-3A through 1.41-5A address only certain provisions of section 41. The following table identifies the provisions of section 41 that are addressed, and lists each provision with the section of the regulations in which it is covered.

| Section of the regulation | Section of the Internal Revenue Code |
| --- | --- |
| § 1.41-2 | 41(b). |
| § 1.41-3 | 41(c). |
| § 1.41-4 | 41(d). |
| § 1.41-5 | 41(e). |
| § 1.41-6 | 41(f). |
| § 1.41-7 | 41(f).41(g). |
| § 1.41-8 | 41(c). |
| § 1.41-3A | 41(c) (taxable years beginning before January 1, 1990). |
| § 1.41-4A | 41(d) (taxable years beginning before January 1, 1986). |
| § 1.41-5A | 41(e) (taxable years beginning before January 1, 1987). |

(2) Section 1.41-3A also addresses the special rule in section 221(d)(2) of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 relating to taxable years overlapping the effective dates of section 41. Section 41 was formerly designated as sections 30 and 44F. Sections 1.41-0 through 1.41-8 and 1.41-0A through 1.41-5A refer to these sections as section 41 for conformity purposes. Whether section 41, former section 30, or former section 44F applies to a particular expenditure depends upon when the expenditure was paid or incurred.

[T.D. 8930, 65 FR 288, Jan. 3, 2001, as amended by T.D. 9401, 73 FR 34187, June 17, 2008]
<page>        EXHIBIT 32.01

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 of Dean Witter Principal
Plus Fund L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey A.
Rothman, President, Demeter Management Corporation, the general
partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13 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 Partnership.









By:  	/s/Jeffrey A. Rothman

Name:		   Jeffrey A. Rothman
Title:	   President

Date:		   May 17, 2004
Exhibit 35.1

 

ANNUAL SERVICER’S COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

 

This Compliance Certificateis furnished pursuant to Section 4.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”), dated as of September16, 2015, by and among Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2015-C, Hyundai Capital America, as seller and servicer (the “Servicer”),Hyundai ABS Funding, LLC (formerly known as Hyundai ABS Funding Corporation), as depositor, and Citibank, N.A., as indenture trusteeand Item 1123 of Regulation AB. The undersigned hereby certifies that:

 

1)          I am a duly authorized officer of the Servicer.

 

2)          A review of the activities of the Servicerfrom September 16, 2015 through December 31, 2015 (the “Relevant Period”) and of the Servicer’s performance underthe Agreement during the Relevant Period has been made under my supervision.

 

3)          Based on such review, the Servicer has,to the best of my knowledge, fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the RelevantPeriod.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have duly executed thisCompliance Certificate this 18th day of March, 2016.
Exhibit 32.2



                            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 of CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended  September 28, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 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/ Michael H. Magusiak
                                           -----------------------------------
                                           Michael H. Magusiak
                                           (Acting Principal Financial Officer)
                                           November 12, 2003



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. and will be retained by CEC Entertainment,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.