alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered March 4 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 13

- 0 16 7 2

- CR No. 05

- 13

- 0 1720

- CR

FRANCISCO JAVIER ESC OBAR, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F13

- 59278

- M, F11

- 71776

- M



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any

ot her reason.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeals, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determ ines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeals, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court find s appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can be filed.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact, any supporting documentation, and a ny orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date
of this order. The appeals are ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeals shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the supplemental record is

re ceived, whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT TONY R AY AM ATI, Applic a nt, v. B R IAN W ILLIAM S, W arde n,

R e sponde nt. No. 18-72277

ORDER *

Applic ation to File

Se c ond or Suc c e ssive M otion Unde r 28 U.S.C . § 2254 Subm itte d July

19, 2019 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : PAEZ, R

A W LINSON, a

nd M URPHY, *** C irc uit Judge s Tony R ay Am ati (Am ati) a

pplie s for le ave to file a

se c ond or suc c e ssive ha be a s pe tition under 28 U.S.C . § 2254 (§ 2254). W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 2244. 

# F IL ED OCT 4 2019 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2). *** The Honora

ble M ic ha e l M urphy , Se nior C irc uit Judgefor the Te nth C irc uit, sitting by

de signa t ion.A ha

be a s pe t itione r m ay

be pe rm i tte d to file a se c ond or suc c e ssive ha be a s pe tition if, a s re le v ant he re : (1) the pe titione r pre se nts a ne w c la im

not pre v iously ra ise d, a nd (2) the pe titione r e sta

blishe s tha

t “ the c la im

re lie s on a

ne w rule of c onstitutiona

l la w, m a de re troa c tive to c a s e s on c olla te ra l re vie w by

the Supre m e C ourt, tha t wa s pre viously

una va ila ble .” 28 U.S.C . § 2244(b)(1)-(2); se e also He nry v . Spe arman , 899 F.3d 703, 705 (9th C ir. 2018). Am ati se e ks re lie f unde r By ford v . State , 994 P.2d 700 (Ne v. 2000). Howe ve r, Am ati’ s c onvic tion wa s not fina l whe n By f ord wa s de c ide d, a

nd Am ati ha d the opportunity

to inc lude a By

ford c la im in his pre vious ha

be a s pe tition in sta te c o urt. His fa ilure to do so re sulte d in a proc e dura l de fa

ult of tha t c l a im . Se e Lounsbury v . Thompson , 374 F.3d 785, 788 (9th C ir. 2004). C onse que ntly , the c urre nt postureof Am ati’ s proc e e dings is one of proc e dura l de fa

u lt ra the r tha n re troa c tive a

pplic ation of c a se a

uthority . Se eid. This proc e d ura l posture doe s not m e e t the sta

nda rd for pe rm ission to file

a se c ond or suc c e ssive ha

be a s pe tition. Se e He nry , 899 F.3d a

t 705. APPL I CAT IO N DE NIE D .

2
§ 407.55 Eligibility to enroll. ( a ) *Basic rule.* Except as specified in paragraph (b) of this section, an individual is eligible to enroll, be deemed enrolled, or reenroll in the Part B-ID benefit if their Part A entitlement ends as described in § 406.13(f)(2) of this subchapter.
( b ) *Exception.* An individual is not eligible for the Part B-ID benefit if the individual is enrolled in or for any of the following: ( 1 ) A group health plan or group or individual health insurance coverage, as such terms are defined in section 2791 of the Public Health Service Act.
( 2 ) Coverage under the TRICARE for Life program under section 1086(d) of title 10, United States Code.
( 3 ) A State plan (or waiver of such plan) under title XIX and is eligible to receive benefits for immunosuppressive drugs described in section 1836(b) of the Act under such plan (or such waiver).
( 4 ) A State child health plan (or waiver of such plan) under title XXI and is eligible to receive benefits for such drugs under such plan (or such waiver).
( 5 ) The patient enrollment system of the Department of Veterans Affairs established and operated under section 1705 of title 38, United States Code and is either of the following: ( i ) Not required to enroll under section 1705 of title 38 to receive immunosuppressive drugs described in section 1836(b) of the Act.
( ii ) Otherwise eligible under a provision of title 38, United States Code, other than section 1710 of such title, to receive immunosuppressive drugs described in section 1836(b) of the Act.
( c ) *Appeals.* Denials for enrollment in the Part B-ID benefit will be considered an initial determination that is appealable under § 405.904(a)(1) of this subchapter.
§ 38.3 Assistance; procedures, limitations. ( a ) *Application.* In order to obtain assistance under this part, the Governor or his State Coordinating Officer must, not later than 60 days following a major disaster declaration by the President, file with the appropriate Regional Director a request which includes: ( 1 ) An estimate of the number of disaster victims who may need professional mental health crisis counseling services and of the number of disaster workers who may need training in the provision of such services;
( 2 ) Identification of the geographical areas in which the need exists;
( 3 ) An estimate of the period during which assistance under this part will be required and of the total funds which will be required to provide such assistance;
( 4 ) A description of the types of mental health problems caused or aggravated by the major disaster or its aftermath; and
( 5 ) Identification of the State and local agencies and private mental health organizations capable of providing professional mental health crisis counseling to disaster victims or training of disaster workers.
( b ) *Review, approval.* The Secretary, upon notification by the Administrator of a State request for assistance under this part, will conduct a review to determine the extent to which such assistance is needed to supplement assistance programs provided by State and local governments and private organizations and, on the basis of that review, prepare and submit a recommendation and report for consideration by the Administrator. Upon approval by the Administrator and his advancement of funds for carrying out the approved assistance, the Secretary may, within the limits of the funds advanced, provide the approved services either directly or through a grant or contract.
( c ) *Eligibility for services.* ( 1 ) In order to be eligible for the professional mental health crisis counseling services available under this part an individual must: ( i ) Have been located within the designated major disaster area or have been a resident of such area at the time of the major disaster or its aftermath; and
( ii ) Have a mental health problem which was caused or aggravated by the major disaster or its aftermath.
( 2 ) Disaster workers who are available on short notice to provide professional mental health crisis counseling services in a major disaster area are eligible for training under this part.
( d ) *Time limitation.* Contracts and grants awarded under this part will not continue beyond 180 days after the first day services are provided pursuant to such contracts and grants, except that upon the recommendation of the Secretary ( 1 ) the Regional Director may extend the 180 day period for up to 30 days or
( 2 ) the Administrator may extend the 180 day period for more than 30 days.
#### § 3.110 Assessment of PSO compliance.

The Secretary may request information or conduct announced or unannounced reviews of, or site visits to, PSOs, to assess or verify PSO compliance with the requirements of this subpart and for these purposes will be allowed to inspect the physical or virtual sites maintained or controlled by the PSO. The Secretary will be allowed to inspect and/or be given or sent copies of any PSO records deemed necessary and requested by the Secretary to implement the provisions of this subpart. Such PSO records may include patient safety work product in accordance with § 3.206(d) of this part.
# Rwanda

110 items

        -    Report  		Rwanda	  March 3, 2017 
        -    Foreign Assistance Evaluations: Program Management  		Sub-Saharan Africa – Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Small Grants (Summary)	  August 7, 2016 
        -    Foreign Assistance Evaluations: Economic Development  		Evaluation of the United States-Africa Clean Energy Finance Initiative (US-ACEF)	   
        -    TIAS  		Rwanda (12-101) – Treaty Concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investment	  January 1, 2012 
        -    TIAS  		Rwanda (10-714.1) – Air Transport Agreement	  July 14, 2010 
        -    TIAS  		Rwanda (08-718) – Agreement Concerning the Program of the Peace Corps in Rwanda	  July 18, 2008 
        -    TIAS  		Rwanda (05-711.1) – Defense Agreement on Status of Forces	  July 11, 2005 
        -    TIAS  		Rwanda (03-821) – Agreement for Cooperation in the Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) Program	  August 21, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Rwanda (03-711) – Agreement Regarding the Surrender of Persons to International Tribunals	  July 11, 2003 
        -    TIAS  		Rwanda (98-206.1) – Defense Assistance Agreement	  February 6, 1998 

previous page1…91011

Back to Top
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 171 (Friday, September 4, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45855-45856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21358]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank

[[Page 45856]]

indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than 
September 30, 2009.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Todd Offerbacker, Assistant 
Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. First Oklahoma Holdings, Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma; to become a bank 
holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of 
Glencoe State Bank, Glencoe, Oklahoma.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (E. Ann Worthy, Vice President) 
2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:
    1. Mason National Bank Employee Stock Ownership Plan and Trust, 
Mason, Texas; to acquire additional shares up to 34.7 percent of Mason 
National Bancshares, Inc., Mason, Texas, and indirectly acquire The 
Mason National Bank, Mason, Texas

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 1, 
2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9-21358 Filed 9-3-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**pursuant to**

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

**as adopted pursuant to**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Robert Y. Lee, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Hydromer, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Hydromer, Inc.

 

|   | Date: September 21, 2007 | By: /s/ Robert Y. Lee |
|--------|--------------------------|-----------------------|

|   | Robert Y. Lee |
|--------|---------------|

|   | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      15,781,404
<SECURITIES>                                 2,470,708
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,622,115
<PP&E>                                         570,931
<DEPRECIATION>                                 321,665
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,009,567
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,273,013
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    54,117,906
<OTHER-SE>                                (41,381,352)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,009,567
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,037,556
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,897,786
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,224,924
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,085,154)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,085,154)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,085,154)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.20)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 23


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
33-23950, 33-70284, 333-03081 and 333-03083 of Max & Erma's Restaurants, Inc.
on Form S-8 of our report dated December 10, 1997, (except for Note 9, as to
which the date is December 31, 1997) incorporated by reference in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Max & Erma's Restaurants, Inc. for the year ended
October 26, 1997.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Columbus, Ohio
January 14, 1998
# C_2006008EN.01000101.xml

| 13.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 8/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 8/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

12 January 2006

(2006/C 8/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2113 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 137,50 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4603 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,68460 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3322 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5477 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 73,81 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0780 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5737 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,798 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 250,19 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,7798 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,6398 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,50 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 37,405 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,6211 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6059 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4049 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,3890 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7359 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,9648 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 179,93 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,3293 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,7734 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3795 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 349,88 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,532 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 63,351 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,4680 |
| THB | Thai baht | 47,671 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2113

JPY

Japanese yen

137,50

DKK

Danish krone

7,4603

GBP

Pound sterling

0,68460

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3322

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5477

ISK

Iceland króna

73,81

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0780

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5737

CZK

Czech koruna

28,798

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

250,19

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6960

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,7798

RON

Romanian leu

3,6398

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,50

SKK

Slovak koruna

37,405

TRY

Turkish lira

1,6211

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6059

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4049

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,3890

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7359

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,9648

KRW

South Korean won

1 179,93

ZAR

South African rand

7,3293

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,7734

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3795

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 349,88

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,532

PHP

Philippine peso

63,351

RUB

Russian rouble

34,4680

THB

Thai baht

47,671

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Annunziata and Overton 

Argued at Alexandria, Virginia 

JACKIE COSTELLO INGRAM 

v. Record Nos. 0721-95-4 and MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

 0722-95-4 JUDGE ROSEMARIE ANNUNZIATA 

 JANUARY 23, 1996 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY 

William L. Winston, Judge 

 Conrad C. Gaarder, for appellant. 

 John K. Bynum, Jr., Assistant Attorney 

General (James S. Gilmore III, Attorney 

General; Steven A. Witmer, Assistant Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellee. 

 Following a jury trial on October 12, 1994, appellant, 

Jackie Costello Ingram ("Ingram"), was convicted of distribution 

of an imitation controlled substance within 1000 feet of school 

property and distribution of an imitation controlled substance. 

Ingram was sentenced, respectively, to three years imprisonment 

and $1500 and one year and $500. On appeal, Ingram contends the 

trial court erred in admitting into evidence a certified 

photocopy of the original Certificate of Analysis. We disagree 

and affirm. 

 Ingram sold imitation crack cocaine to an undercover police 

officer within 100 yards of an elementary school. At trial, the 

Commonwealth sought to introduce into evidence a certified 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

photocopy of the original Certificate of Analysis, previously 

identified by a Commonwealth witness as a "xeroxed copy of the 

original certificate for analysis." Ingram's contention that the 

photocopy was hearsay and that only the original could be 

admitted is without merit. 

 First, Ingram waived his claim because he did not accept the 

Commonwealth's offer to retrieve the original certificate after 

the court asked Ingram if he wanted it. See Rule 5A:18. Ingram 

cannot invite error and then take advantage of the situation he 

created. See, e.g., Manns v. Commonwealth, 13 Va. App. 677, 

679-80, 414 S.E.2d 613, 615 (1992). 

 Second, even absent waiver, the trial court's decision must 

be affirmed. As a matter of law, official records shall be 

received as evidence when authenticated and certified by the 

clerk to be a true record. Code § 8.01-389(A). A copy of such a 

record is admissible if it is authenticated. Code § 8.01-391(C); 

Proctor v. Commonwealth, 14 Va. App. 937, 938-39, 419 S.E.2d 867, 

867-68 (1992). "Authenticated" and "certified" are synonymous 

terms in this context. Owens v. Commonwealth, 10 Va. App. 309, 

311, 391 S.E.2d 605, 605-06 (1990) (concluding that clerk's 

certification of copy of record properly authenticated record 

pursuant to Code § 8.01-389). The clerk's certification that the 

document in this case is a true copy meets the statutory standard 

for admissibility. Accordingly, the appellant's conviction is 

affirmed. 
- 3 - 

Affirmed.
#### A. Wayne LAFFERTY, Appellant, v. Mildred Cart LAFFERTY a/k/a Mildred C. Lafferty, Appellee.

Nos. 81-85, 81-681.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 2, 1981.

George P. Kickliter, Tampa, for appellant.

Charles F. Clark and Ted R. Manry, III, of Macfarlane, Ferguson, Allison & Kelly, Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Appellee having moved for attorney’s fees on this appeal, the motion is hereby granted with the amount of the fee to be determined by the trial court.

DANAHY, A. C. J., and CAMPBELL and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.