alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 16, 2014

No. 04-14-00412-CR

Robert MARTINEZ, JR.,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR6698

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

ORDER

A Trial Court’s Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal has been filed in this appeal 

in which the trial court judge certifies that the underlying criminal case “is a plea-bargain case, 

and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” It is therefore ORDERED that the trial court clerk 

electronically file a clerk’s record, no later than June 27, 2014, containing the following 

documents:

1. All pre-trial orders and the related pre-trial motions;

2. The Court Admonishments, the Waiver, Consent to Stipulation of Testimony and 

Stipulations, and all other documents relating to the defendant’s plea bargain;

3. The judgment;

4. All post-judgment motions and orders;

5. The notice of appeal;

6. The Trial Court’s Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal; and

7. The criminal docket sheet.
The clerk of this court is ORDERED to send a copy of this order to the attorneys of record, the 

trial court clerk, and the court reporter(s) responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this 

appeal.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

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

court on this 16th day of June, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
MEMO

FROM: Susan Sharkey, OPPT/CCD

TO: Wendy Hoffman, OPPT/EETD

RE: Estimated number of joint submissions for IUR 2011

DATE: September 8, 2009

As per our phone conversation of today, Sept. 8, 2009, EPA is expecting to receive 

approximately 10 to 20 joint IUR submissions for the 2011 IUR collection. This estimate 

is based on past IUR reporting.
September 11, 1940

No. 44324.

Suit 4257.

#### Steel, *Inc.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 131 affirmed. C. A. D. 128.
#### In the matter of the appeal of Joseph Beck Tyler, administrator of the estate of Michael Allen, from the assessment of the transfer inheritance tax.

[Submitted June 4th, 1918.

Decided June 21st, 1918.]

The death duty imposed by the War Revenue act of 1916 is a tax upon decedents’ estates, and in assessing the state transfer inheritance tax is to be deducted from the value of the estate in ascertaining the clear market value of the property transferred, and the fact that in intestacy the federal estate tax falls upon all of the transferees uniformly, and not upon the residuary estate, as in cases of testacy, makes no difference.

On an appeal from an assessment of the comptroller of the treasury.

*Mr. Joseph Beck Tyler,*for the appellants.

*Mr. Herbert W. Boggs,*assistant attorney-general, for the state.

Backes, Vice-Ordinary.

Michael Allen, a resident of Woodstown, Salem county, died January 14th, 1917, intestate, leaving a net estate for distribution of $300,000, in round figures, at which sum the comptroller of the treasury appraised the estate and upon which he levied a transfer inheritance tax. The appellant, the administrator of the estate, claimed a'reduction from the assessment to the amount of $5,217, paid by him to the United States government for “estate tax,” which the comptroller refused to allow, and from his ruling this appeal was taken.

*171The judgment is controlled by the decision in “Estate of Ferdinand W. Roebling.” The case is not distinguishable, on the ground that in intestacy the federal estate tax falls upon all of the transferees uniformly and not upon the residuary estate, as in cases of testacy. The same principles govern.
No. 46449.

#### Protest 10616-K of Anco Import Corp. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain of the items consist of spangles slung, similar to those involved in *Fashion Trimming Cory.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 199, C. D. 462), the claim at 60 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1503 was sustained, holding the merchandise in ques*295tion dutiable as “articles not ornamented with beads, spangles, or bugles, not embroidered, tamboured, appliqued, or scalloped, composed wholly or in chief value of spangles.”
Exhibit 32.1

               CERTIFICATION BY THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
                         COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
                 THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

      I, Donald J. Freed, am President and Chief Executive Officer of
Competitive Technologies, Inc. (the "Company").

      This certification is being furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in connection
with the filing of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended April 30, 2005 (the "Report").

      I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge:

      1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

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


Date: June 14, 2005                             /s/ Donald J. Freed
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Donald J. Freed
                                                President and
                                                Chief Executive Officer of
                                                Competitive Technologies, Inc.
EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


The Board of Directors and Shareholders Interplay Entertainment Corp.

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  registration  statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-50254,  Form S-8 No. 333-60583,  Form S-3 No. 333-50252,  Form
S-3 No. 333-59088 and Form S-3 No. 333-60272) of Interplay  Entertainment  Corp.
of our  report  dated  April 6,  2007  relating  to the  consolidated  financial
statements  and schedule,  which report  appears in the December 31, 2005 annual
report on Form 10-K of Interplay Entertainment Corp. for the year ended December
31, 2006.

         /s/ Jeffrey S. Gilbert

April 6, 2007
No. 44337.

#### Protests 29725-K, etc., of Brooklyn Packing Co., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keéfe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Stokby*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 343, C. D. 358) it was held that the merchandise is properly dutiable at 3)4 cents per pound under paragraph 703. Tariff Act of 1930, on the basis of the net weight of the contents of the cans less 10 percent allowance for the gelatinous material.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

(PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Stephen P. DeFalco, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of MDS 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 issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.	The 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 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 issuer, 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 issuer'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;

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

5.	The issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the 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 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 issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

|Date:  January 27, 2006 | /s/Stephen P. DeFalco(Stephen P. DeFalco)President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
|----------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### Douglas E. HOLMES, Appellant, v. Denise K. SYX, Appellee.

No. 98-2846.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 23, 1999.

*594William M. Layton, Lake Worth, for appellant.

Randy Kaye Garvey of Law Offices of Randy Kaye Garvey, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

When the Florida Department of Revenue notified Mr. Holmes that he was delinquent in payment of his child support obligations as ordered in the judgment of dissolution, Holmes filed (and served on the Department) a document which, at least arguably, was intended as his petition to contest the existence of the delinquency. The former wife sought and obtained an order dismissing the petition for failure to state a cause of action. We affirm.

Holmes contends that the trial court, in dismissing the petition, denied him the opportunity to present the defense of laches to the claimed arrearage in child support, citing *Phillips v. Adams,*339 So.2d 665 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). While laches can be a valid defense to an effort to collect child support arrearage, *see Davis v. Department of Revenue,*689 So.2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); *Robinson v. State,*473 So.2d 228 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); *Phillips v. Adams.*Holmes’ petition simply did not allege facts to establish the necessary elements of such defense.

The petition alleged Holmes’ obligation to pay support for his two minor sons, his payments pursuant thereto, and the remarriage of his former wife; it further alleged that in June, 1992, at the request of his former wife and her husband, Jeffrey N. Syx, Holmes signed a consent for Mr. Syx to adopt the two boys (a copy being attached to the petition), and that all parties agreed that any child support ar-rearage would be forgiven and Jeffrey N. Syx would adopt the children; lastly, it alleged that although prior to signing the consent for adoption Holmes had been in regular and constant contact with his children, he thereafter honored the parties agreement and had not contacted or seen the children from that time to the present.

Holmes makes no claim that the agreement relieved him of his support obligation, see *Robinson,*nor does he claim that Syx adopted the children, thereby relieving him of his support obligation. His sole argument is that his not having contacted or seen his children since June, 1992, now entitles him to assert laches as a defense against the claim for delinquent child support. The fallacy of that argument lies in the absence of any allegation that the agreement required him to refrain from contact with his children, an understandable omission in view of the consent form language expressly providing that Holmes could see the children at any time, just as any non-related person could. Since the allegations show that the alleged prejudice, i.e., the lack of contact with the children, was not caused by undue delay in the Department seeking the delinquent support, the petition failed to show a factual basis for the defense of laches.

The other issue raised is without merit and does not require discussion. The judgment is affirmed.

STEVENSON, HAZOURI, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Ramstein Airmen build a bare base in contested exercise

By Staff Sgt. Timothy Moore86th Airlift Wing Public Affairs

                GROSTENQUIN AIR BASE, France  –              *Editor's note: The original story can be viewed on the Ramstein Air Base website.*

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

435th Air Ground Operations Wing435th Contingency Response Group86th Airlift Wing37th Airlift SquadronContested ForgeGrostenquin Air Basefuelwatercargodelivery
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                               ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     THE PREDECESSOR(1)                     BIRCH
                                               ------------------------------   ------------------------------
                                                 1995       1996       1997       1997       1998       1999
                                               --------   --------   --------   --------   --------   --------
                                                                (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT RATIOS)
<S>                                            <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>
Earnings
  Total earnings (loss)......................    $ 94       $289       $268     $(1,789)   $(16,208)  $(61,804)
  Income tax.................................      --         --         --          --          --         --
                                                 ----       ----       ----     -------    --------   --------
Subtotal.....................................     175        494        454      (1,789)    (16,208)   (61,804)
Fixed charges
  Interest charges...........................      58        102         97          --          --         --
  Interest factor of operating rents.........      13         16         19          --          --         --
                                                 ----       ----       ----     -------    --------   --------
Total fixed charges..........................      71        118        116          --          --         --
                                                 ----       ----       ----     -------    --------   --------
Earnings, as adjusted........................    $246       $612       $570     $(1,789)   $(16,208)  $(61,804)
                                                 ====       ====       ====     =======    ========   ========
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges...........    3.46x      5.19x      4.91x         --          --         --
Deficiency of earnings to fixed charges......      --         --         --     $(1,789)   $(16,208)  $(61,804)
</TABLE>

Note: For purposes of calculating the ratio of earnings to fixed charges,
      earnings are defined as loss before income taxes plus fixed charges. Fixed
      charges consist of interest expense and a reasonable approximation of the
      interest factor included in rental payments on operating leases.

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

(1) The Predecessor company is Valu-Line Companies which was merged with us
    during February 1998. Prior to February 1998, we had no revenues and were in
    the developmental stage.
No. 48216.

#### Protests 95736-K, etc., of N. Y. Mdse. Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It was found that the banks in question are similar to those passed upon in Abstract 42749 and that the tape measures are similar to those involved in Abstract 43372, which records were incorporated herein. In accordance therewith the court held the banks dutiable as hollow ware at 40 percent under paragraph 339 and the tape measures as household utensils at 40 percent under paragraph 339, as claimed.
No. 56719.

protest 177617-K (New York).

#### B. Shackman & Co., Inc., and S. Stern, Henry & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of paper boxes the same in all material respects as those the subject of *B. Shackman & Co.*v. *United States*(26 Cust. Ct. 111, C. D. 1309), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
**Consent
        of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
 
 We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements (No.
        333-113852 on Form S-8, No. 333-137501 on Form S-8, No. 333-124278 on Form
        S-3,
        No. 333-140354 on Form S-3, No. 333-148649 on Form S-3, and No. 333-148653
        on
        Form S-3) of CapLease, Inc. of our report dated March 3, 2008 relating to
        our
        audit of the consolidated financial statements, financial schedules and internal
        control over financial reporting, which appear in this Annual Report on Form
        10-K of CapLease, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007.
 
  /s/
        McGladrey & Pullen LLP
  New
        York,
        New York
 March
        4,
        2008
Case Wo. 6,582.

#### GOODYEAR v. PROVIDENCE RUBBER CO.

[See Case No. 5,583.]
CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

&

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (PRINCIPAL (FINANCIAL OFFICER)
PURSUANT TO 
TITLE 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 40-F of MDS Inc. (the "Company") for the year ending October 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen P. DeFalco, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and James A.H. Garner, as Executive Vice-President Finance & Chief Financial Officer, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. s.1350, as adopted pursuant to s.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge that :

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Company.

|Date:  January 27, 2006 | /s/Stephen P. DeFalco(Stephen P. DeFalco)President & Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
|----------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date: January 27, 2006 | /s/James A. H. Garner(James A. H. Garner)Executive Vice-President Finance & Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
|---------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to s.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 Company for purposes of s.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.