alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Cornell McHenry, Appellant

No. 06-14-00131-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 202nd District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

12F0117-202). Opinion delivered by 

Justice Carter, Chief Justice Morriss and 

Justice Moseley, participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Cornell McHenry, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 5, 2015

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
No. 62198.

#### Regal Novelty Co., Incorporated *v.*United States,

protest 315499-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise described as “Art. No. 102 — Firepolished Bandings, 12 Rows” is dutiable at 30 percent under paragraph 218 (f), as modified, *supra,*the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 86, Misc.

#### Evans *v.*Arizona.

Supreme Court of Arizona. Certiorari denied.
No. 65105.

#### Arthur Salm, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 58/23006-10299 (Chicago).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of manufactures of leather, other than reptile leather, to wit, leather picture frames, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: mark.luttrell@tinker.af.mil

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:50:09 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,

Mark Luttrell

Edmond, OK 73013
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 178 (Friday, September 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63622-63623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19989]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-1248]


Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: PCI 
Synthesis

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.

ACTION: Notice of application.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: PCI Synthesis has applied to be registered as a bulk 
manufacturer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION listed below for further drug information.

DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), 
and applicants therefore, may submit electronic comments on or 
objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before 
November 14, 2023. Such persons may also file a written request for a 
hearing on the application on or before November 14, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The Drug Enforcement Administration requires that all 
comments be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal, which provides the ability to type short comments directly into 
the comment field on the web page or attach a file for lengthier 
comments. Please go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the 
online instructions at that site for submitting comments. Upon 
submission of your comment, you will receive a Comment Tracking Number. 
Please be aware that submitted comments are not instantaneously 
available for public view on https://www.regulations.gov. If you have 
received a Comment Tracking Number, your comment has been successfully 
submitted and there is no need to resubmit the same comment.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this 
is notice that on March 30, 2023, PCI Synthesis, 9 Opportunity Way, 
Newburyport, Massachusetts 01950-0195, applied to be registered as a 
bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled 
substance(s):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Drug
          Controlled substance             code          Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphetamine............................     1100  II

[[Page 63623]]

 
Methamphetamine........................     1105  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to develop manufacturing processes, conduct 
analytical method validation and conduct bulk product stability 
studies. No other activities for these drug codes are authorized for 
this registration.

Claude Redd,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2023-19989 Filed 9-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
No. 448, Misc.

#### Darling *v.*Wilkins, Warden.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
From: Higgins, Cortney [mailto:Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 9:12 AM 

To: Wayland, Robertj 

Subject: FW: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Carbon Pollution Guidelines for Existing Power Plants: 

Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Stationary 

Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units 

Hi, 

Attached are the handouts from this meeting. 

Regards, 

Cortney 

<< 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout1.pdf >> 

<< 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout2.pdf >> 

<< 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout3.pdf >> 

<< 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout4.pdf >> 

-----Original Appointment----- 

From: Echols, Mabel E. 

Subject: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Carbon Pollution Guidelines for Existing Power Plants: Emission 

Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility 

Generating Units 

When: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 4:00 PM-4:30 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). 

Where: Room 10103 New Executive Office Building 

This meeting was requested by Benjamin Longstreth, Natural Resources Defense Council.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF GENERAL INSTRUMENT CORPORATION FOR THE SIX MONTHS
ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          82,854
<SECURITIES>                                    25,659
<RECEIVABLES>                                  326,120
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,120)
<INVENTORY>                                    261,031
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               828,150
<PP&E>                                         487,019
<DEPRECIATION>                               (260,101)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,693,269
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          374,773
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,517
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,248,791
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,693,269
<SALES>                                        905,425
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               905,425
<CGS>                                          671,316
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  671,316
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,264)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (44,019)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,090
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (29,929)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (29,929)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.20)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
 32(a)



CERTIFICATION
 OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 report on Form 10-Q of WWA Group, Inc. for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 as filed
 with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Eric
 Montandon, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
 pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



| | (1) | This 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 this report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the small business issuer at the end of the period covered by this report and results of operations of the small business issuer
 for the period covered by this report.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:
 August 13, 2008

/s/
 Eric Montandon

Eric
 Montandon

Chief
 Executive Officer



Thiscertification
 accompanies this report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be
 deemed filed by the small business issuer for the purposes of §18 of
 the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into
 any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
 (whether made before or after the date of this report),
 irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing. A signed original of
 this written statement required by §906 has been provided to the small
 business issuer and will be retained
 by the small business issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
 Commission or its staff upon request.



25
From: lost2woods@neo.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:15:44 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I recently became aware of the subject HHS action allegedly implementing a provision of "Obamacare"

consistent with the recommendation of the IOM (Institute of Medicine) -- to require all private health

insurance plans to cover contraceptives and sterilization services (including those that abort a fertilized

egg within a woman free of charge to the patient. As a result, organizations that provide insurance to

their employees will be forced to cover such services, even if they object. The effect is that the cost of

these "free" services will be shifted to plan participants through higher premiums both to employees in

employer sponsored plans, and to individuals in the individual insurance market, i.e. myself.

I am writing today to ask you to 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 revisit your definition of "religious employer" and offer an effective 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, and

the many statements of our President and members of Congress to the effect that no federal funds will

be used to implement abortion. (While technically, no federal funds would be used, imposition of a rule

that requires private parties to pay for something they would not otherwise voluntarily pay is

tantamount to imposition of an additional federal tax and federal expenditure!) 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.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

David Ronyak

Akron, OH 44303
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65207-65208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20564]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: October 3, at 1 p.m.; October 4, 2023, at 1 p.m.

PLACE: Alpharetta, GA.

[[Page 65208]]


MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Meeting of the Board of Governors

Tuesday, October 3, at 1 p.m.; Wednesday, October 4, 2023, at 1 p.m.

    1. Strategic and Operational Items.
    2. Financial and Personnel Items.
    3. Administrative Items.
    General Counsel Certification: The General Counsel of the United 
States Postal Service has certified that the meeting may be closed 
under the Government in the Sunshine Act.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Michael J. Elston, Secretary of 
the Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 
20260-1000; Telephone: (202) 268-4800.

Michael J. Elston,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-20564 Filed 9-19-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Case *No.*12,879.

#### In re SIMPSON.

[2 N. B. R. 47 (Quarto, 17).] 1

District Court, N. D. Illinois.

1868.

Bankruptcy — Discharge — Release from Imprisonment.

Where a judgment in trespass for malicious imprisonment and whipping was recovered against A., who afterwards was adjudged a bankrupt, *held,*that upon receiving his discharge he must be released from imprisonment.

William H. Holden and Robert Hervey, for petitioner.

Francis Adams, for judgment creditor.

The facts are, at the December term, 1866, of the superior court of Chicago, D. B. Carroll recovered a judgment in trespass (for a malicious imprisonment and whipping) for the sum of three thousand five hundred dollars. In January, 1867, a ca. sa. was issued, and March 25th, 1867, Simpson was lodged in jail. In July, 1867, he filed his petition in bankruptcy, and on January 7th, 1867, he received his discharge; Carroll paying no attention to the proceedings.

Upon the hearirg on the motion for the writ of habeas corpus, Judge Drummond decided that the prisoner must be discharged, and upon the return of the sheriff to the writ the prisoner was duly discharged from custody. In reply to counsel the judge remarked that in order to have proved their judgment against the bankrupt, the judgment creditor should have had the prisoner discharged from custody upon the order of court, and then they could prove the debt. The question of jurisdiction was raised, but the judge remarked that though the state court would probably release the prisoner, it was the duty of the district court to see that he was released, and to protect Ifim.
No. 62714.

#### Rosenthal-Block China Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 283328-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the candy boxes are not tableware, kitchenware, or table or kitchen utensils, not containing 25 percent or more of calcined bone, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# E C 

# /

R Incorporated Providing Environmental Technical Support Since 1989

501 Eastowne Drive, Suite 325 y Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Telephone: (919) 484-0222 y Fax: (919) 484-0122 MEMORANDUM

DATE: February 9, 2010

SUBJECT: Existing Population of St ationary RICE - Attachments

FROM: Tanya Parise, EC/R, Inc.

TO: Melanie King, EPA OAQPS/SPPD/ESG

The purpose of this memorandum is to document the information used to estimate the population of existing stationary engines used to estimate the national im pacts associated with

the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Existing Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combus tion Engines (RICE) in 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ. Provided

in the Attachments to this memorandum are several tables illustrating the Power Systems

Research information that was used to estimate the population and projection of stationary spark ignition and compression ignition (CI) engines. This memorandum contains information supporting the memorandum entitled “Existing P opulation of Stationary RICE,” which is available from the rulemaking docket as Document ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0029-0014. This information supports the population estimates developed to estimate impacts from stationary existing RICE less than or equal to 500 horsepower (HP) that are located at major sources, stationary existing RICE that are loca ted at area sources, and stationary existing nonemergency CI RICE greater than 500 HP located at major sources that are subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ.2 Attachments Spreadsheet Tables with PSR Information Used to Estimate the Population and Projection of Stationary Engines
Case No. 8,758.

#### MACDONALD v. BLACKMER et al.

[9 O. G. 746.]

Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.

April 4, 1876.

Patents — Skirt Protector — Infringement.

The patent of plaintiff sustained, and decree for injunction and account against defendants. No legal principles involving construction of patent law involved, in the opinion of the court.

[Cited in Macdonald v. Shepard, Case No. 8,-767; Macdonald v. Sidenberg. Id. 8,768; Macdonald v. Shepard, 4 Fed. 229.]

*39[This was a bill in equity by Helen Marie Macdonald against S. M. Blackmer and others for the alleged infringement of patent No. 155,534, granted to H. M. Macdonald, September 29, 1874.]

George E. Betton, for complainant

Browne & Holmes, for defendants.

[NOTE. Upon petition of respondents, a rehearing was granted, and they were permitted to file a supplemental answer. The decree was not set aside, but the fact of the patent and the evidence thereto necessary were permitted to be introduced. Upon the original papers, supplemental answer, and evidence, the case was again heard, and the decree for plaintiff allowed to stand. Case No. 8,757.]

[For other cases involving this patent, see Macdonald v. Shepard, 4 Fed. 229, 10 Fed. 919, and Case No. 8,767; Macdonald v. Sidenberg, Id. 8,768.]

SHEPLEY, Circuit Judge.

Since the disclaimer, which was filed before the date of the bill in this case, the claim of the complainant is limited to that only which was described in the specification of her patent— viz., “as a new article of manufacture, a skirt-protector, having a fluted or plated border bound with or composed of enameled cloth or other water-proof material.” I see no reason to doubt that she was the first and original inventor -of .this article, as distinguished from a skirt-fácing, which is an entirely different article, and from a skirt-protector, which' being made of wigan or similar material, was substantially useless for the purpose, as compared with the complainant’s invention.

Decree for injunction and account, as prayed for' in the bill.