alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NO. 07-08 -011 8-CR IN THE CO UR T OF APPEA LS FO R THE S EVEN TH D ISTRI CT O F TEXAS

AT AM AR ILLO PAN EL B JU NE 11, 2008

_________

_________

_________

___ AGAP IT O HERNANDEZ, APPEL LANT

V. THE S TATE OF TEXAS, APPEL LEE

_________

_________

_________

______ FRO M T HE 25 1 ST DIS T RI CT COU RT OF P OT T ER COU NT Y; NO . 33, 020- C; H ON ORABLE AN A ES TEVEZ, JU DG E

_________

_________

_________

____ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK
ME MO RA ND UM OPI NI ON App ellantAgapito P e t e He rnan dez appe als his conviction for driv ing w hile int ox ic a t e d

. Th e c e rt i fi c a t i o n o f r i g h t o f a p p e a l e x e c u t e d b y t h e t r i a l c o u rt s t a tes that “de f e n d a n t has waiv ed th e rig ht of app eal.” By lette r dated May 20, 20 08, this Court not if ied ap pellan t tha t the app eal w as subje ct to dismissal base d on the certif ication unless the C our

t recei v ed an a m e n d e d cert ific ati on prov idi ng the ri g ht of appea l or co unsel prov ide d other g ro unds for cont inu ing the appeal

. N o amended cer ti ficat ion w as re cei v ed dur ing the ti me w e al lot ted, nor has appel lan t i nformed us of any othe r g ro unds for2

cont inu ing the appeal

. Acc ordin g ly, we di smi ss the appeal pursuantto Tex as Rul e of App ellate Proced ure 25 .2(d).

Jam es T . Camp bell Justice
Do not p ubl is h.
§ 237.101 Scheduling of bridge inspections. ( a ) Each bridge management program shall include a provision for scheduling an inspection for each bridge in railroad service at least once in each calendar year, with not more than 540 days between any successive inspections.
( b ) A bridge shall be inspected more frequently than provided for in the bridge management program when a railroad bridge engineer determines that such inspection frequency is necessary considering conditions noted on prior inspections, the type and configuration of the bridge, and the weight and frequency of traffic carried on the bridge.
( c ) Each bridge management program shall define requirements for the special inspection of a bridge to be performed whenever the bridge is involved in an event which might have compromised the integrity of the bridge, including but not limited to a flood, fire, earthquake, derailment or vehicular or vessel impact.
( d ) Any railroad bridge that has not been in railroad service and has not been inspected in accordance with this section within the previous 540 days shall be inspected and the inspection report reviewed by a railroad bridge engineer prior to the resumption of railroad service.
Exhibit 4.6


 


CUSIP 904572 104


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
  UNI-PIXEL, INC.

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

  	
   

  
	
  COMMON STOCK

  	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
  SEE REVERSE
  FOR

  
	
   

  	
  CERTAIN
  DEFINITIONS

  
	
   

  	
  

  
	
   

  
	
  This

  
	
  certifies

  
	
  that

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  is the owner of

  
	
   

  
	
  FULLY PAID
  AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE COMMON STOCK, $0.001 PAR VALUE, OF

  
	
  UNI-PIXEL,INC.

  
	
   

  
	
  (hereinafter called the “Corporation”), transferable on the books of
  the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized
  attorney, upon surrender of the Certificate properly endorsed. This
  certificate and the shares represented hereby are issued and shall be held
  subject to all the provisions of the Articles of Incorporation, as amended,
  and the Bylaws of the Corporation, as amended (copies of which are on file at
  the office of the Transfer Agent), to all of which the holder of this
  Certificate by acceptance hereof assents. This Certificate is not valid
  unless countersigned and registered by the Transfer Agent and Registrar.
  Witness the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of
  its duly authorized officers.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  DATE:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Countersigned:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  SECURITIES TRANSFER CORPORATION

  
	
  PRESIDENT

  	
   

  	
  P.O.Box 701629

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Dallas, Tx. 75370

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  TRANSFER AGENT - AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE

  
	
  SECRETARY
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2




                    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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Somanetics Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended February 28, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic
Report"), I, William M. Iacona, Vice President, Finance, Controller, Treasurer
and 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 Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly
                  presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
                  and results of operations of the Company.


Dated:  April 4, 2003               /s/ William M. Iacona
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    William M. Iacona, Vice President, Finance,
                                    Controller, Treasurer and Chief Financial
                                    Officer
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 29, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 136117 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 136117 COA: 282620 Wayne CC: 92-011570-01-FC LORENZO JEWELL, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 20, 2008 order of the Court of Appeal s is considered, and it is DE NIED, because the defendant’s motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).

d0721 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 29, 2008

Clerk
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 1, 2017

s0125 

# Order

Clerk February 1, 2017

153324

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGA N,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 153324

COA: 321487

Wayne CC: 10

- 006891

- FC

RODERICK LOUIS PIPPEN,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 14, 2016

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral

argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. MCR 7.305(H)(1).

The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the da te of this order

addressing whether the defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel based on

trial counsel’s failure to adequately investigate and present testimony from a res gestae

witness. See, e.g., Strickland v Washington , 466 US 668, 68 9; 104 S Ct 2052; 80 L Ed

2d 674 (1984); Town s v Smith , 395 F3d 251 (CA 6, 2005). The parties should not submit

mere restatements of their application papers.
§ 25.225 Educational institutions eligible to submit transition plans. ( a ) *Application.* This section applies to each educational institution to which §§ 25.300 through 25.310 apply that: ( 1 ) Admitted students of only one sex as regular students as of June 23, 1972; or
( 2 ) Admitted students of only one sex as regular students as of June 23, 1965, but thereafter admitted, as regular students, students of the sex not admitted prior to June 23, 1965.
( b ) *Provision for transition plans.* An educational institution to which this section applies shall not discriminate on the basis of sex in admission or recruitment in violation of §§ 25.300 through 25.310.
§ 260.11 Investigation charge. ( a ) Applicants for financial assistance under this part may be required to pay an investigation charge of up to one-half of one percent of the principal amount of the direct loan or portion of the loan to be guaranteed.
( b ) When an investigation charge is assessed, one-half of the investigation charge shall be paid by Applicant at the time a formal application is submitted to FRA.
( c ) Within 60 days after the date of filing of the application, Applicant shall pay to the Administrator the balance of the investigation charge.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                           5
<LEGEND>

This schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted from Century
Properties  Fund XVIII  2000  Second  Quarter  10-QSB  and is  qualified  in its
entirety by reference to such 10-QSB filing.

</LEGEND>

<CIK>                               0000704271
<NAME>                              CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
<MULTIPLIER>                                           1,000


<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                      APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                        JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                   615
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              0
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           0 <F1>
<PP&E>                                                28,218
<DEPRECIATION>                                       (11,592)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        17,882
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      0 <F1>
<BONDS>                                               19,127
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                                            (1,798)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          17,882
<SALES>                                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       2,566
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       2,267
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       697
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            0
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                             299
<EPS-BASIC>                                             3.59 <F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0
<FN>

<F1> Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet. <F2> Multiplier is 1.

</FN>


</TABLE>
-----Original Message----- 

From: dave_jacobsen@yahoo.com [mailto:dave_jacobsen@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 4:28 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 28, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone and 

Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (RIN 

1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from charging 

higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket expenses for mental 

health treatment than they would for other physical health care. Thank you 

for ensuring that mental health care and physical health care coverage are 

included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Christine Jacobsen 

19997 Powers Road 

Bend, OR 97702
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 838

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals who

are exempt from the self-employment tax by reason of their religious

beliefs to establish Keogh plans, etc.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 1, 2001

Mr. PITTS (for himself, Mr. PORTMAN, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr. REGULA, Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania, and Mr. SOUDER) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals who are exempt from the self-employment tax

by reason of their religious beliefs to establish Keogh

plans, etc.

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

3 SECTION 1. AVAILABILITY OF PENSION PLANS TO SELF-EM4 PLOYED INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE EXEMPT

5 FROM THE SELF-EMPLOYMENT TAX BY REA6 SON OF THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (A) of section

8 401(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining
2

•HR 838 IH

1 earned income) is amended by adding at the end thereof

2 the following new sentence: ‘‘This subparagraph shall be

3 applied as if the term ‘trade or business’ for purposes of

4 section 1402 included service described in section

5 1402(c)(6).’’.

6 (b) SIMPLE RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS.—Clause (ii) of

7 section 408(p)(6)(A) of such Code (defining self-em8 ployed) is amended by adding at the end the following new

9 sentence: ‘‘The preceding sentence shall be applied as if

10 the term ‘trade or business’ for purposes of section 1402

11 included service described in section 1402(c)(6).’’.

12 (c) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—Paragraph (1) of sec13 tion 219(f) of such Code is amended by striking the last

14 sentence.

15 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

16 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

17 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
-----Original Message----- 

From: jessiedeebakes@aol.com [mailto:jessiedeebakes@aol.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 1:27 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

jessica baker 

62 russet ln 

middletown, CT 06457
Exhibit 32

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 Henry County Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David H. Gill, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 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 all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ David H. GillDavid H. Gill, President and CEO(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ David H. GillDavid H. Gill, Acting CFO(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


August 14, 2009
100%

Oshore Mineral

Extraction

Ship and

Boat Building

Tourism and

Recreation

Living

Resources

Marine

Construction

Marine

Transportation

NATIONAL SUMMARY

The United States Ocean 

and Great Lakes Economy

2009 Sector 

Composition

To obtain ocean and Great Lakes data, go to www.csc.noaa.gov/enow

Living

Resources

Marine

Construction

Marine

Transportation

Oshore Mineral

Extraction

Ship and Boat

Building

Tourism and

Recreation

Employment Wages GDP

2005-2009

Economic Trends

The economic resilience of the U.S. ocean and 

Great Lakes economy allowed it to grow during the 

largest economic downturn in recent history when 

nearly all other sectors in the U.S. were declining.

Coastal States

2.0%

6.0%

12.0%

72.0%

4.0%

5.0%

2.0%

20.0%

24.0%

41.0%

7.0%

7.0%

3.0%

42.0%

19.0%

28.0%

5.0%

4.0%

1.7% 

GDP Growth

64.9%

GDP Growth

1.4%

Employment 

Growth

U.S. Ocean

and Great Lakes 

Economy

U.S. Economy

-2.3% 

Employment

Decline

Economics: National Ocean Watch (ENOW)

In 2009,

the U.S. Ocean and

Great Lakes

economy produced

2.6 million

jobs and

$223 billion

in GDP
You have reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications.  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. (Historical purposes)

**Title:**  2004Steel Industry of the Future Fiscal Year 2004 Annual Report U.S. Department of Energy2003Steel Annual Report Fiscal Year 2003 U.S. Department of Energy
§ 215.113 Defective plain bearing wedge. A railroad may not place or continue in service a car, if a plain bearing wedge on that car is— ( a ) Missing;
( b ) Cracked;
( c ) Broken; or
( d ) Not located in its design position.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the Fifth Circuit

_____________________________________

No. 95-20558

_____________________________________

ADVANCE CARTRIDGE TECHNOLOGY, Plaintiff-Appellant

VERSUS
J.B. INTERNATIONAL SHIPPERS, LTD.; EXCO, INC.; BROTHER FRANCE, S.A., Defendants-Appellees.

______________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(95-CV-904)

______________________________________________________
August 8, 1996 Before JONES, DUHÉ and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * The court has carefully considered the excellent briefs
and pertinent parts of the record in the above-styled case and
concludes that it must affirm the district c ourt’s judgment for essentially the reasons stated by that court. In addition, the2

court clearly had authority to decide a motion to dismiss for lack
of personal jurisdiction while the motion to remand was pending.

See , e.g. , Villar v. Crowley Maritime Court , 990 F.2d 1489 (5th
Cir. 1993), cert. denied , 114 S.Ct. 690 (1994). A vitts , relied

upon by a ppellants, is easily distinguishable, because in that

case, unli ke here, the federal court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction was patent, and no question of personal jurisdiction

was at issue. Second, this court agrees with the district court’s discussion of personal jurisdiction and its conclusion that there

was no personal jurisdiction over Brother F rance for contractrelated claims. Third, to the extent ACT asserts what might be
construed as tort allegations against Brother France, there were
insufficient contacts between Brother France and ACT in Texas to justify personal jurisdiction over the appellee on that basis.

AFFIRMED

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>          9
<MULTIPLIER>       1,000
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         144,458
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,467
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                45,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    262,407
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         537,871
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           539,700
<LOANS>                                      1,447,489
<ALLOWANCE>                                     20,276
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,604,737
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,872,998
<SHORT-TERM>                                   329,501
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             32,888
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       369,350
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,604,737
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                105,343
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               40,397
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   750
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               146,490
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              36,847
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              49,395
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           97,095
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,250
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               1,036
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 72,642
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 53,512
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      34,387
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    34,387
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                      6,932
<LOANS-PAST>                                     8,432
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   570
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                21,529
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    5,344
<RECOVERIES>                                     1,841
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               20,276
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>