alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered September 1 1 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05
- 13
- 00578
- CR MONIQUE DANAE MCCLIN TON, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law Rockwall County, Texas Trial Co urt Cause No. CR11
- 1799 

### O RDER On September 4, 2013, Official Court Reporter Deborah K. Hamon filed a request for an extension until September 6, 2013 to file the reporter’s record. On September 9, 2013, Hamon filed a letter representing the reporter’s re cord would be filed on that date. The reporter’s record
has not been filed.
We GRANT the request for an extension. We ORDER Deborah K. Hamon to file the reporter’s record within TEN days of the date of this order. The Court will not grant any further

ex tensions.
/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
Exhibit 10.16

NOTE EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION AGREEMENT

THIS NOTE AND EXTENSION MODIFICATION AGREEMENT
(Agreement) is entered into by and between JILCO INDUSTRIES, INC., a California corporation (Payor) and LEONARD M. ROSS, a California resident (Payee).

Payor and Payee do hereby mutually acknowledge and agree that Payor is presently liable for the indebtedness represented by a certain Revolving Demand
promissory note payable to Payee dated November 7, 1989 in the original principal amount of TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00) (Note) with interest accruing on the unpaid principal balance at the rate of 11% per year. Payor and
Payee previously agreed to extend the initial maturity date of December 31, 1991 to December 31, 1994. Said Note was not paid on December 31, 1994 and additional advances under the Note have been paid to Payor through April 15,
2005 so that the principal balance is now $12,166. Interest on the unpaid principal balance has continued to accrue through July 31, 2006. Payor has requested Payee to again extend the maturity date of said Note and Payor is willing to do so.

NOW, THEREFORE, FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION IN HAND

RECEIVED, the parties hereto, and each of them, do hereby agree that effective as of the date hereof, the unpaid principal portion of the Note and all unpaid accrued interest, if any, shall be all due and payable on July 31, 2007.

Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to affect the obligation of Payor regarding the payment of interest accrued on the Note through
the date hereof, or to affect any obligations of Payor under the Note, except as set forth herein.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto,
and each of them, have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth below but effective as of the 31st day of December, 1994.



|                         |  |                          |  |                        |  | 
|------------------------ |  | ------------------------ |  | ---------------------- |  | 
|                         |  | JILCO INDUSTRIES, INC.   |  |                       
|                         |  | a California corporation |  |                       
|                         |  |                          | 
|Date:    August 29, 2006 |  | By                       |  | /s/ Martha J. Kretzmer |  | 
|                         |  | Martha J. Kretzmer       |  |                       
|                         |  | President                |  |                       
|                         |  | Payor                  |  |                       
|                         |  |                         
|Date:    August 29, 2006 |  | /s/ Leonard M. Ross      |  |                       
|                         |  | Leonard M. Ross          |  |                       
|                         |  | Payee                  |  |
Case 2:04-cv-01960-GEB-PAN   Document 37    Filed 11/10/05   Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-01960-GEB-PAN   Document 37    Filed 11/10/05   Page 2 of 2

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2012-07-20T20:27:10-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
[No. 11476.

Department One.

July 22, 1914.]

#### Hugh Fish, *Appellant,*v. The Town of Ruston, *Respondent.**1*

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Pierce county, Card, J., entered May 17, 1913, upon sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, dismissing an action on contract, tried to the court.

Appeal dismissed.

*Walter M. Harvey*(G. *C. Israel*and *H. B. Noland,*of counsel), for appellant.

*Anthony M. Arntson,*for respondent.

1

Reported in 141 Pac. 1037.

Per Curiam.

This action was commenced by Hugh Fish against the Town of Ruston, a municipal corporation, to recover for services alleged to have been performed under a written contract and also for damages alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff by reason of false and fraudulent representations of defendant’s agents. From an order dismissing the action, plaintiff has appealed.

Respondent has moved this court to dismiss the appeal for the reason that no abstract of the record has been served or filed by appellant.

The appeal was taken after June 12, 1913, and the record fails to show that any abstract has been served or filed in compliance with the requirements of chapter 116, Laws of 1913, p. 349, § 1 (3 Rem. & Bal. Code, § 1730-1). Under the authority of our recent holding in *Ollar-Robinson Co. v. O’Neill, ante*p. 1, 141 Pac. 194, the appeal will have to be dismissed. It is so ordered.
Before the Second Division,

February 21, 1945

No. 50036.

#### Protest 105766-K of Schiaparelli, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was agreed at the trial that exhibit 1, representing the merchandise in question, was in chief value of paper and lined with paper, but was not covered or lined with cotton or other vegetable fiber. An inspection of exhibit 1 shows it to consist of a thick circular paper base with a depression in the center for holding a perfume bottle. Fitted or clamped over this base is a cover or top in the shape of a cone about 7 inches high, with a small *211circular opening or mouth at the apex, and with a metal handle on the outside. It appeared from the testimony that a bottle of perfume was firmly glued to the base of exhibit 1; that all of the perfumes manufactured and sold by the plaintiff had distinctive bottles for each variety; that each distinctive bottle had an immediate box or container, as well as an outside box for shipping purposes; and that the immediate box or container was of a shape to fit the particular shape of the bottle it contained. It was held that the cone-shaped covers or containers in question come within the dictionary definition of the term “boxes” and also within the purview of paragraph 1405. *(United States*v. *Park & Tilford,*7 Ct. Cust. Appls. 422, T. D. 36983 cited.) The merchandise was therefore held dutiable as claimed at 5 cents per pound and 10 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1405, as modified by T. D. 49753.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DAVID DE SOUZA,

PLAINTIFF, : CIVIL ACTION

 :

v. :

 :

EUGENE POLKALSKI, et al, :

DEFENDANTS : NO. 02-4449

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of October, 2002, the Plaintiff

having failed to pay the appropriate filing fee to bring this

action, it is hereby ORDERED that this matter will be closed

unless the Plaintiff either, pays the filing fee of one-hundred

and fifty (150)dollars or files a motion to proceed in forma

pauperis within ten (10) days. 

AND IT IS SO ORDERED

______________________________

Clarence C. Newcomer, S.J. 

Case 2:02-cv-04449-CN Document 2 Filed 10/31/2002 Page 1 of 1
```

[111th Congress Public Law 305]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[[Page 124 STAT. 3279]]

Public Law 111-305
111th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  337 West Clark Street in Eureka, California, as the ``Sam Sacco Post 
       Office Building''. <<NOTE: Dec. 14, 2010 -  [H.R. 6387]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SAM SACCO POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 337 West Clark Street in Eureka, California, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Sam Sacco Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sam Sacco 
Post Office Building''.

    Approved December 14, 2010.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 6387:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010):
            Nov. 16, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 2, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1935

IN RE: DWAYNE CURTIS DELESTON,

Petitioner.

On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.

(2:99-cr-00751-DCN-6)

Submitted: December 20, 2011 Decided: December 22, 2011

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dwayne Curtis Deleston, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Dwayne Curtis Deleston petitions for a writ of 

mandamus seeking an order from this court directing his 

immediate release from prison and monetary compensation. We 

conclude that Deleston is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used 

only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States 

Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. 

Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, 

mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a 

clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan 

Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).

The relief sought by Deleston is not available by way 

of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis and we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 3
- 0147 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ALEXANDER GARRETT LAFORGE III,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 20, 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 13 2024

08/13/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0147
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 29, 2021

No. 04-21-00098-CR

Isaac CARDENAS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR10269

Honorable Kevin M. O'Connell, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On June 28, 2021, this court issued an order informing appellant that his pro se brief was 

due on August 12, 2021. On July 29, 2021, appellant filed a pro se motion for an extension of 

time based on his belief that his brief was due July 25, 2021.

Although appellant’s pro se brief is not yet due, in the interest of justice, his motion is 

GRANTED. Appellant’s pro se brief is due no later than September 13, 2021.

_________________________________

Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 29th day of July, 2021.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7679
WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA-03-1455-8-DKC) Submitted: March 10, 2004 Decided: April 7, 2004 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Allen Legg, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: William Allen Legg seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his suit. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on July 16, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on September 16, 2003. Because Legg failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4576 

To amend the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, to reauthorize the Colorado River System conservation pilot program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 18, 2024 

Mr. HICKENLOOPER (for himself, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. ROMNEY, Mr. BENNET, 

and Ms. LUMMIS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Energy and Water Development and Related 

Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, to reauthorize the 

Colorado River System conservation pilot program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Colorado River Basin 

5 System Conservation Extension Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4576 IS

1 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF COLORADO RIVER SYSTEM 

2 CONSERVATION PILOT PROGRAM. 

3 Section 206 of the Energy and Water Development 

4 and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 (43 

5 U.S.C. 620 note; Public Law 113–235), is amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ‘‘this Act’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘the Colorado River Basin System 

8 Conservation Extension Act’’; 

9 (2) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ‘‘2024’’ and 

10 inserting ‘‘2026’’; and 

11 (3) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘2025’’ and 

12 inserting ‘‘2027’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.
  /s/ Gordon F. DuGan

Gordon F. DuGan
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.01   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Welwind Energy International Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Tammy-Lynn McNabb, Chief Executive Officer and 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:  (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 result of operations of the Company.      /s/ Tammy-Lynn McNabb By: Tammy-Lynn McNabb Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Dated: November 22, 2010  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Before the Third Division,

April 7, 1953

No. 57250.

petition 6820-R (Portland, Oreg.).

#### Einar H. Crown *v.*United States,

Ekwall, Judge:

This petition is filed under authority of section 489 of the Tariff Act of 1930, seeking remission of additional duty assessed by reason of the fact .that the final appraised value of certain imported kippered herring and Danish blue cheese exceeded the value declared on entry.

In support of the petition, the owner and operator of the importer of record, the petitioner herein, testified that the entries were prepared in the office of his firm in Chicago, from information received from the shipper, and were sent to a customs broker at the port at which entry was to be made by said broker. Prior to the time the entries were prepared, the Government examiner was consulted and the prices and conditions under which the goods were entered were discussed with the examiner, and the entire file in connection with the importation was shown to said examiner. After examining such information as the importer possessed, the examiner stated that the prices were correct.

On cross-examination, the witness stated that in every case which his firm had, the invoice was presented to the examiner, and he was consulted as to the correct valuation. .When asked if he inquired from the exporter as to the freely offered price of his merchandise, the witness replied that in Norway, the country of exportation, the prices were the same to every buyer, and from information obtained by him when he visited Norway, he learned that all paid the same prices. All the information that his firm received from the shipper in respect to the value of the instant merchandise was sent to the customs broker. This was the first time that there was any question as to his firm’s entries of this type of merchandise.

At the conclusion of the hearing in Chicago, the case was transferred to the port of entry at the request of the Government. However, no additional evidence was produced at that port.

Upon this record, we find 'that the petitioner has established facts sufficient to warrant the remission of additional duties under the holding in *Wolf & Co.*v. *United States,*13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 589, T. D. 41452, wherein the scope of the burden of proof placed upon a petitioner in this type of case is stated as follows:

> * * * First, He [the petitioner] must show that in undervaluing his goods he was acting in entire good faith; second, that there were no facts or circumstances known to the petitioner when he made his entry which would cause a prudent and reasonable person to question the correctness of the values given by him; third, that he has made to the collector in making his entry, a full and candid disclosure of all the material facts in his possession bearing upon the value of the merchandise imported.

The petition is therefore granted.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Keane, Inc. on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-00175, 33-16187, 33-00176, 2-76657, 2-
91931, 33-16188, 33-38361, 2-40012, 2-87193, 2-61721, 2-89418, 33-38360, 33-
38361, 33-52760, 33-52758, 33-52756, 33-52762 and 333-16113) and Form S-3 (File
No. 333-46329) of our report dated March 3, 1998, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements of Keane, Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and
1996, and for the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, which report is
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



Boston, Massachusetts                         /s/   Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
March 31, 1998
================================================================================

EXHIBIT 32.2   PATIENT PORTAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

   Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
         (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Thomas Hagan, Financial Officer of Patient Portal Technologies, Inc. (the
"Registrant"), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 of
the Registrant (the "Report"):

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
     13(a)[15(d)] of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Registrant.


Dated:  1/31/2007                        /s/ THOMAS HAGAN
                                         -----------------------
                                         Thomas Hagan
                                         Chief Financial Officer

















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Luna Innovations Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending
June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dale E. Messick, 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 to 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/ DALE E. MESSICK    
|Dale E. Messick        
|Chief Financial Officer

September 9, 2009