alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## NO. 12-08-00204-CV IN THE COUR T OF APP EALS TWELFTH COURT OF APP EALS D ISTR ICT

TYLER, TEX AS

GA RY JIM

WILKIN SON , § APP EAL FRO

M T HE 1 73 RD APPELLANT V . § JUDICIAL DISTRI CT COURT OF RO NN Y BROW NL OW , SH ERIF F, HEN DE RSO N C OU NTY, TE XAS, APP ELL EE § HEN DE RSO N C OU NTY, TE XAS
MEMORA NDUM OPIN ION PER CU RIAM This pro se in forma

pauper is appea l is being dismissed for f ailure to c omply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedur e. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.3(c) . The judg ment in this case wa s signe d on May 2, 2008. On May

12, 2008, Appellant filed a notice of a

ppeal that f

ailed to contain the information re quired by

Texas Rules of Appellate Proc edure 9.5 and 25.1(e ), i.e., a cer tificate of se rv ic e sh ow ingse rv ic e on a ll p a rt ie s to the tr ia l c ourt ’s jud g me nt. On M ay 2 0 , 2 0 08, Appellant wa s notified pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedur e 37.1 that the notice of

appea l w as defe ctive for f ailure to c omply

with Rules 9.5 and 25.1(e) . He wa s further noti fi ed t h at u n l ess he f

iled an ame nded notice of appea l on or befor e June 19, 2008, the appea l would be re fer

red to the c ourt for dismissal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.3(c)
. The de adline for filin g an am en ded notice of appea l has passed, a

nd Appellant fa iled to respond to our notice or c or re c t hi s d e fe c tiv e no tic e of app eal
. Ac c or din g ly , th e a pp e a l is dism issed fo r f

a ilure to c omp ly with the Texas Rul es of Appellate Proce dure. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 4 2. 3( c ); Fe ist v . Be rg , No. 1 2
- 0 4
- 0 0 0 0 4
- CV , 2 0 0 4 WL 2 5 2 7 8 5 , a t * 1 ( T e x. A p p . – T y le r F e b
. 1 1 , 2 0 0 4 , p e t. d e nied); F eis t v.2

Hub e rt , No. 12-03-00442- CV, 2004 WL 252285, at *1 (Te x . App.

– T y le r F e b . 11, 2004, pet. denied)
. Opinion delivere d J une 30, 2008. Pane l co ns i s t ed of

Wor t hen , C. J. , Gri

f f i t h, J. , an d Hoyl e, J.

(PUBL I SH)
Twelfth Court of Appeals

1517 West Front St., Ste 354

Tyler, Texas 75702

RE: No. 12-14-00332-CV

Robert C. Morris vs. Sherri Milligan, Et Al

T/C No- 349-6270

Dear Court Clerk,

June 18, 2015

FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS

12th Court of Anpeals District

mnl^

TYLER TEXAS

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

I am writing to inquire if the attorney for the Appellee's has filed his appeal

Brief, as of this date. I beleive the deadline for filing has passed and I have not

recieved any notice for an extension of time to file or a copy of the appellate

brief he filed, if he has filed oneCould you please inform me if the Appellee's have filed an Appellate Brief,

what date, or if the Appellee's have filed for an extensionof time?

Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter, it is greatly appreciated

and welcomed.

Sincerely,

cc: file

Morris

Appellant Pro Se

TDCJ-ID | 1311083

Smith Unit

1313 CR 19

Lamesa, Texas 79331
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 2.1

                       CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND MERGER

                                     MERGING

                               INTRUSION.COM, INC.

                                      INTO

                               ODS NETWORKS, INC.


                     ODS Networks, Inc., a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Delaware (the "CORPORATION"), under and in
accordance with Section 253 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware (the "DGCL"), does hereby certify:

                     FIRST: That the Corporation was incorporated pursuant to
the DGCL on August 30, 1995 under the name of "Optical Data Systems, Inc."

                     SECOND: That the Corporation owns 100% of the outstanding
shares of each class of capital stock of Intrusion.com, Inc., which was
incorporated pursuant to the DGCL on February 21, 2000 ("INTRUSION").

                     THIRD: That the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the
"BOARD") has, pursuant to resolutions duly adopted at a telephonic meeting of
the Board dated April 17 , 2000 and filed with the minutes of the Board,
authorized and approved the merger of Intrusion with and into the Corporation
(the "MERGER"). Such resolutions have not been modified or rescinded and are in
full force and effect on the date hereof. A true and correct copy of such
resolutions are attached hereto as EXHIBIT A.

                     FIFTH: That the Corporation shall be the surviving
corporation in the Merger (the "SURVIVING CORPORATION").

                     SIXTH: That the Merger shall be effective on June 1, 2000
at 8:00 a.m., Eastern Standard Time.

                     SEVENTH: That the Certificate of Incorporation of the
Corporation, as amended and in effect on the date hereof, shall be the
Certificate of Incorporation of the Surviving Corporation; provided, however,
that at the effective time of the Merger, Article One of the Certificate of
Incorporation of the Surviving Corporation shall be amended in its entirety to
read as follows: "The name of the corporation is Intrusion.com, Inc." The
Surviving Corporation's Certificate of Incorporation, as amended hereby, is
restated as shown in EXHIBIT B attached hereto.

<PAGE>


                     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this
Certificate of Ownership and Merger on behalf of the Corporation on May 15,
2000.



                                         ODS NETWORKS, INC.



                                            /s/ JAY R. WIDDIG
                                         -----------------------------------
                                         Jay Widdig, Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor Manuel MENDOZA-RIVAS, aka Victor Manuel Mendoza, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-50541.

D.C. No. CR-00-00043-GHK-1.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 9, 2001.*

Decided July 12, 2001.

Before RYMER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and POGUE, Judge.**

*

*The*panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument Fed R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 Honorable Donald C. Pogue, United States Court of International Trade Judge, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Victor Manuel Mendoza-Rivas appeals his conviction and sentence to 70 months imprisonment for illegally re-entering the United States after being deported in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

I

Mendoza contends that his guilty plea was involuntary because the district court *686did not ensure that he understood his right to counsel and his right against self-incrimination and would waive them by pleading guilty. However, the court advised Mendoza of his constitutional and statutory rights, including the right to counsel through every stage of the proceeding and the right not to be compelled to be a witness against himself. Mendoza confirmed that his attorney had explained these rights to him, and that he was satisfied with his attorney’s performance. He was asked, and affirmatively said that he understood that by pleading guilty he would be waiving or giving up his privilege against self-incrimination, and that he would give it up. He also indicated that he was pleading guilty freely and voluntarily, and understood the consequences of his guilty plea. In addition, his attorney stated that Mendoza understood the consequences of entering a guilty plea and in his view, was pleading voluntarily with an understanding of the nature of the charges and the consequences of the plea. The court found that Mendoza’s plea was intelligently made. Accordingly, there was no Rule 11 error. *See United States v. VanDoren,*182 F.3d 1077, 1080 (9th Cir.1999).

II

Mendoza’s contention that his sentence violates the rule set forth in *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is foreclosed by our decisions in *United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda,*234 F.3d 411, 414-15 (9th Cm. 2000) (plain error review) and *United States v. Arellano-Rivera,*244 F.3d 1119, 1127 (9th Cir.2001) (de novo review).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
From: luis.sanoja@lmco.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:45:17 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Luis Sanoja

Arlington, TX 76017
From: carlavcaldwell@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:14:56 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Carla Caldwell

Marietta, GA 30066
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 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, Ayman S. Ashour, 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 Quarterly Report of Identive Group, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Identive Group, Inc.



|                   |  |  |  |  |  |                                                  
|------------------ |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 6, 2011 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ AYMAN S. ASHOUR                              
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | Ayman S. Ashour                                  
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)                    

I, Melvin
Denton-Thompson, 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 Quarterly Report of Identive Group, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2011 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Identive Group, Inc.



|                   |  |  |  |  |  |                                             
|------------------ |  |  |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 6, 2011 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ MELVIN DENTON-THOMPSON                  
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | Melvin Denton-Thompson                      
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer and Secretary       
|                   |  |  |  |  |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM _______________________________________ AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               30,459,267
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,643,231
<INVENTORY>                                 25,463,121
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            61,049,140
<PP&E>                                      38,874,639
<DEPRECIATION>                              19,785,302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             185,990,348
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       87,725,167
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,665
<OTHER-SE>                                  82,894,990
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               185,990,348
<SALES>                                    112,752,859
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           112,752,859
<CGS>                                       76,475,095
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               76,475,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,855,517
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,110,601)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   377,970
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,488,571)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,488,571)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.17)
        

</TABLE>
Before the Second Division,

January 22, 1957

No. 60456.

#### Glensder Textile Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 275658-K, etc (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silk scarves or squares similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *The Specialty House, Inc., Bryant & Heffernan, Inc., et al.*(42 C. C. P. A. 136, C. A. D. 585), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### Erastus Brooks, Respondent, v. Thomas Winsor, Appellant.

—judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Dykman, J.
----

| Delaware                                       | 37-1105865                           |
|------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation) | (IRS Employer Identification Number) |

|   |   |   | Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)                  |
|--------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   |                                                                                                   |
|   |   |   | Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)                 |
|   |   |   |                                                                                                   |
|   |   |   | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
|   |   |   |                                                                                                   |
|   |   |   | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) |
|   |   |   |                                                                                                   |

----

| Item 8.01. | Other Events. |
|------------|---------------|

| Item 9.01. | Financial Statements and Exhibits. |
|------------|------------------------------------|

| Exhibit No. | Description                                    |
|-------------|------------------------------------------------|
| 99.1        | Distribution Agreement dated November 17, 2010 |

----

| Date:  November 18, 2010 |           By:  /s/Michael G. Sposato                              |
|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                               |                  Michael G. Sposato |
|                               |                  Secretary          |

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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOUND ON PAGES
22 AND 23 OF THE COMPANY'S ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR OF 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          17,911
<SECURITIES>                                    14,667
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,426
<ALLOWANCES>                                       758
<INVENTORY>                                     14,671
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,018
<PP&E>                                          25,857
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,021
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  77,178
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,171
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           165
<OTHER-SE>                                      66,214
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    77,178
<SALES>                                         92,327
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                92,327
<CGS>                                           55,795
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   55,795
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                46,112
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,941)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,004)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,937)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,937)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.30)
        

</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

N o. 04

- 19

- 00025

- CR

Guillermo CAPETILLO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017

- CRB

- 000381

- D1

Honorable Joe Lopez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED September 30, 2020.

_____________________________ Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Signature Eyewear, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Michael Prince, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 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(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 Prince
--------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
March 22, 2005