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

**San Antonio, Texas**

August 24, 2021

No. 04

- 21

- 00268

- CR

Sean Michael EARL

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR4829W

The Honorable Jennifer Pena , Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On July 19, 2021, appellant filed a motion to recalculate the due date for filing appellant’s brief, stating the reporters’ record on file in this court was not yet complete. On August 20, 2021, the final outstanding volume of the reporter’s record was filed in this court. Accordingly, appellant’s motion is DENIED AS MOOT. App ellant’s brief is due thirty (30) days from the date the final volume of the reporter’s record was filed

— on or before September 20, 2021. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(a).

_________________________________ Re beca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

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

court on this 24th day of August, 2021

.

_________________________ __________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
Exhibit32.2

Certification of CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the AnnualReport on Form 10-K of Alamosa (Delaware), Inc. (the"Company") for the fiscal year ended December31, 2004, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the "Report"), I, KendallCowan, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge:

|           |                                                                                                                    |
|-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1)  | The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934;and |

|           |                                                                                                                                                    |
|-----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2)  | The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. |

/s/ Kendall W.Cowan

|  |
|--|
|  |  |
|  |

Name:     KendallCowan Title:       Chief FinancialOfficer Date:       March 24, 2005

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to theextent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed bythe Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended.

----
# C_2007152EN.01001601.xml

| 6.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 152/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 152/16

---

Notice concerning the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of imports into the Community of certain tube or pipe fittings originating, inter alia, in Thailand: modification of the name of a company subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate

inter alia

(2007/C 152/06)

Imports of certain tube or pipe-fittings, of iron or steel, originating, inter alia, in Thailand are subject to definitive anti-dumping duties, imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 964/2003 (1), as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1496/2004 (2).

inter alia

1

2

Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co., Ltd., a company located in Thailand, whose exports to the Community of certain tube or pipe-fittings of iron or steel, are subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate of 7,4 % by the aforementioned Regulation, has informed the Commission that on 1 August 2006 it changed its name to Awaji Materia (Thailand) Co., Ltd. The company has argued that the change of name does not affect the right of the company to benefit from the individual duty rate applied to the company under its previous name of Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co., Ltd.

The Commission has examined the information supplied and concluded that the change of name in no way affects the findings of Council Regulation (EC) No 964/2003 as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1496/2004. Therefore, the reference to Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co., Ltd, Samutprakarn should be read as Awaji Materia (Thailand) Co., Ltd, Samutprakarn in Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 964/2003.

The Taric additional code 8850 previously attributed to Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co., Ltd, shall apply to Awaji Materia (Thailand) Co., Ltd.

---

(1)  OJ L 139, 6.6.2003, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ L 275, 25.8.2004, p. 1.

2

---
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**OFFICER’S
      CERTIFICATION**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


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


**(18
      U.S.C. 1350)**





The
      undersigned Zak
      W.
      Elgamal ,
      duly
      appointed and incumbent officer of American
      Surgical Holdings, Inc .,
      a
      Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), in connection with the Corporation’s
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      does hereby represent, warrant and certify pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, that, to the best of his knowledge:





1.  The
      Report is in full compliance with reporting requirements of Section 13(a) 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 operation of the Corporation.





May
      14,
      2007


/s/*Zak
                W. Elgamal*Zak
                W. ElgamalChairman
                of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Before the Second Division,

June 24, 1938

No. 38884.

#### Protests 354069-G, etc., of Nathan Schreiber, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

From the record it was found that certain items consist of hats or hoods in part of braids the same as those involved in *Pustet*v. *United States*(13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 530, T. D. 41396). The claim at 75 percent under paragraph 1430 was therefore sustained.
No. 51411.

#### Protests 786847-G, etc., of S. Kravet & Sons et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-17-0000317

12-JUL-2019

10:13 AM
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, April 12, 2007 at 2 p.m. ET. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Inez De Jesus at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7977. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10 (a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Thursday, April 12, 2007 at 2 p.m. ET via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7977, or write Inez De Jesus, TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Inez De Jesus. Ms. De Jesus can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7977, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

*The agenda will include:*                     Various IRS issues.                 

Dated: March 6, 2007. 

John Fay, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E7-4489 Filed 3-12-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Milton "Todd" Ault, III, as Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of IPEX, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

      (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 small business issuer is made
known to us by others, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;

      (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls 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; and

      (c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions);

      (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

June 2, 2005


/s/ Milton "Todd" Ault, III
----------------------------------
Milton "Todd" Ault, III
Chief Executive Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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.

_________________________________________ Clerk September 24, 2012

p0917 

# Order

September 24, 2012

145390

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 145390

COA: 308901

Huron CC: 11

- 004930

- FH

RANDALL JAMES McILVEENE,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 22, 2012 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 470 

To repeal changes made by health care reform laws to the Medicare exception 

to the prohibition on certain physician referrals for hospitals, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2023 

Mr. LANKFORD (for himself, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. TILLIS, Mr. YOUNG, Mr. 

COTTON, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. PAUL, Mr. 

CORNYN, Mr. CRUZ, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. LEE, and Mr. BUDD) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Finance 

A BILL 

To repeal changes made by health care reform laws to the 

Medicare exception to the prohibition on certain physician referrals for hospitals, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Patient Access to 

5 Higher Quality Health Care Act of 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 470 IS

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF HEALTH CARE REFORM PROVISIONS 

2 LIMITING MEDICARE EXCEPTION TO THE 

3 PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN PHYSICIAN RE4 FERRALS FOR HOSPITALS. 

5 Sections 6001 and 10601 of the Patient Protection 

6 and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111–148; 124 Stat. 

7 684, 1005) and section 1106 of the Health Care and Edu8 cation Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–152; 

9 124 Stat. 1049) are repealed and the provisions of law 

10 amended by such sections are restored as if such sections 

11 had never been enacted. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TERRY MONTGOMERY,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2116 FCD DAD P

vs.

W.A. DUNCAN, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On January 26, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Neither

party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02116-FCD-DAD Document 22 Filed 03/06/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed January 26, 2006, are adopted in full;

2. Respondents’ May 31, 2005 motion to dismiss the habeas petition as untimely

is denied; and

3. Within thirty days from the service of this order, respondents shall file their

answer to petitioner’s second amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

DATED:March 6, 2006

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02116-FCD-DAD Document 22 Filed 03/06/06 Page 2 of 2
#### Mark Cleland et al., Appellants, v 60-02 Woodside Corp. et al., Respondents.

[633 NYS2d 529]

—In an action to recover *308damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dye, J.), dated June 29, 1994, which denied their motion to preclude the defendants from offering evidence at trial as to the condition of a stairway and/or stoop at the time the plaintiff Mark Cleland allegedly fell and injured himself.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Evidence of subsequent repairs and remedial measures is not discoverable or admissible in a negligence case unless there is an issue of maintenance or control *(see, Niemann v Luca,*214 AD2d 658; *Cacciolo v Port Auth.,*186 AD2d 528; *Klatz v Armor El. Co.,*93 AD2d 633). In their appellate brief, the defendants admit control of the subject premises. Accordingly, the information which the plaintiffs sought regarding repair work performed on the stairway and/or stoop subsequent to the accident was not material or relevant to prosecuting the action *(see,*CPLR 3101) and the failure on the part of the defendants to provide the plaintiffs with this information did not warrant the issuance of an order of preclusion regarding the condition of the stairway and/or stoop at the time of the accident. Balletta, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.
(Reap. Dec. 10114)

#### Campus Casuals of Calif., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 54933.

(Decided December 5, 1961)

*Stein & Shostak*for the plaintiff.

*William H. Orrick, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for ithe defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the Appeal for Reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Cases, consists of ladies sweaters, “classic” quality, exported from Japan; and that, at the time of exportation thereof to the United States, the market value or the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the invoice unit values, net packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the merchandise the subject of this stipulation is not included in the list of articles designated by the Secretary of the Treasury in T.D. 54521, as provided for in Sec. 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress, and that said merchandise is subject to appraisement under Sec. 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeal for Reap-praisement enumerated in the Attached Schedule of Cases may be deemed submitted for a decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On tbe agreed facts, I find that the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, 70 Stat. 943, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the ladies’ sweaters, “classic” quality, involved herein, and that such values are the invoice unit values, net, packed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Exhibit 12.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

     I, Elias Rodriguez-Vina Cancio, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Terra Networks,
S.A.;

     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

     4. The company's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

     (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 company, 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) [Reserved];

     (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company'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; and

     (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the company's internal control
of internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period
covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the company's internal control over financial
reporting; and;

     5. The company's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the company's auditors and the audit committee of the company's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the company's ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial information; and

     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the company's internal control over
financial reporting.

     Date: April 14, 2005


                                            /s/ Elias Rodriguez-Vina Cancio
                                            -------------------------------
                                            Elias Rodriguez-Vina Cancio
                                            Chief Financial Officer
Before the First Division,

May 1, 1961

No. 65548.

#### Lautier Fils, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 169193-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issue herein is the same as that involved in *United States*v. *Dodge & Olcott, Inc.*(47 C.C.P.A. 100, C.A.D. 737), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.