alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### K. R. M., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. JJ-79.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 18, 1978.

Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, and Marva Alexis Davis, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and George R. Georgieff, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review and reversal of an adjudication of delinquency on a charge of first degree arson. Damage to a “structure” is an essential element to the *807crime proscribed by F.S. 806.01. “Structure” is specifically defined by F.S. 806.-01(3) as meaning “any building of any kind, any enclosed area with a roof over it, and any vehicle, vessel, or aircraft.” A reading of the record sub judice reveals substantial evidence of appellant’s misuse of fire and is certainly sufficient to sustain a finding that he willfully and maliciously, by fire, damaged personal property within a structure. However, the essential element of damage to a structure, as defined in the statute, is absent. Had appellant’s adjudication of delinquency been on a charge of criminal mischief, proscribed by F.S. 806.13, we would affirm because we find the other points raised by appellant to be without merit.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

BOYER and MELVIN, JJ., concur.

McCORD, C. J., dissents.

McCORD, Chief Judge,

dissenting.

Although the damage was not great, it is clear from the evidence that there was some damage to fixtures which were a part of the building. I would affirm and, therefore, dissent.
Exhibit 13.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Amir Loberman, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:





1. This Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of D. Medical Industries Ltd. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 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 Company.





Date: October 26, 2011





/s/ Amir Loberman

Amir Loberman

Chief Financial Officer
Order entered October 24 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 14

- 00556

- CR

JASON ALLEN SKINNER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F12

- 00955

- M



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any

other reason.

 The trial court shall f irst determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosec ute the appeal, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that ef fect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing th e reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact,

any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal

shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT C HIEF JUSTICE
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 24, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-40779

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID ESPINOSA-VALLES,

also known as David Espinoza,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-02-CR-87-1

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

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

David Espinosa-Valles appeals his guilty plea conviction 

and sentence for being found in the United States after

deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. EspinosaValles argues that the sentencing provisions in 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b) are unconstitutional on their face and as applied in

his case. He contends that the unconstitutional portions of

8 U.S.C. § 1326 should be severed from the statute. He asks us
No. 02-40779

-2-

to vacate his conviction and sentence, reform the judgment to

reflect a conviction only under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), and remand

his case for resentencing under that provision. 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Espinosa-Valles acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been called

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 489-90

(2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review.

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). Accordingly, the judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED. 

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. The Government asks that an

appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
256 La. 897

#### J. Minos SIMON v. SWITZERLAND GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Ltd.

No. 50885.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 23, 1970.

In re: Switzerland General Insurance Company, Ltd. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Lafayette. 238 So.2d 257.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law in its judgment.
Treasury approves Alaska’s plan to invest $20 million of CPF funding in a 

multi-purpose community facility to improve resources for communities 

that enable work, education, and health monitoring.

Capital Projects Fund Award Fact Sheet

Alaska

 

▪ Program Summary: $20 million for Multi-Purpose Community Facilities (18% of 

CPF allocation)

▪ Program Description: The expansion and renovation of 

the Iliuliuk Family and Health Services Center will create 

additional space for clinical and expanded primary care 

services, and provide space dedicated to multi-purpose 

community use. The renovated center will provide 

public access to free internet service with equipment 

needed for youth and adults to access on-line educational courses and career 

programming. The center serves the remote community of Unalaska/Dutch 

Harbor.

▪ Key State Contact: Iliuliuk Family & Health Services (IFHS)

Alaska Capital Projects Fund Program Overview

For More Information: 

For Media Inquiries: 

For General Inquiries:

Please visit www.treasury.gov/CPF

Please contact the U.S. Treasury Press Office at (202) 622-2960

Please email CapitalProjectsFund@treasury.gov for additional information

Alaska estimates this 

center will benefit 

approximately 5,000 

individuals annually.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 21, 2023

NO. 03-23-00734-CV

Luan Duy Nguyen, Individually and as Trustee for the Luan Duy Nguyen Revocable 

Management Trust and as Trustee for the Doan-Nghiem Thi Nguyen Revocable 

Management Trust, Appellant

v.

Rufina Hemmasi, and David Hemmasi, as Executor for the Estate of Majid Hemmasi, 

Deceased, d/b/a DRFM Investment, Appellees

APPEAL FROM PROBATE COURT NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES BAKER, TRIANA, AND SMITH

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on September 28, 2023. Having 

reviewed the record, the Court holds that appellant has not prosecuted his appeal and did not 

comply with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for 

want of prosecution. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court 

and in the court below.
#### Shirley Mae Taylor COURTNEY, Appellant, v. Albert T. COURTNEY, Appellee.

No. 72-1021.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 6, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### SUMMIT FIDELITY AND SURETY CO. v. STATE.

No. 38309.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 217 So.2d 601.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 27 (Monday, February 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 5994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3212]


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


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Division 
of Extramural Activities; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting:

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders 
and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel (Telephone Conference Call).
    Date: February 25, 1997.
    Time: 11:00 a.m.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 7550 Wisconsin Avenue, 
Room 9C10, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Dr. Howard Weinstein, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Institutes of Health, 7550 Wisconsin Avenue, 
Room 9C10, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-9223.
    Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate one RFP 96-13 Contract 
Proposal.

    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the applications and/or proposals, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the urgent need to meet timing limitations imposed by 
the review and funding cycle.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.853, Clinical 
Research Related to Neurological Disorders; No. 93.854, Biological 
Basis Research in the Neurosciences)

    Dated: February 4, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
NIH Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-3212 Filed 2-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 32.2 - SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



EXHIBIT 32.1

Section 1350 Certifications



I am the Principal Accounting Officer
of EnzymeBioSystems, a Nevada corporation (the “Company”). I am delivering this certificate in connection with the
Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal period ended June 30, 2016 and filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“Form
10-K”).



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of EnzymeBioSystems (the “Company”)
certifies to his knowledge that:

|                          |                                                                                                                                                                                            
|------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1)                       | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2016 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 that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company.                                  
|                          |                                                                                                                                                                                            
|/s/  John Dean Harper     |                                                                                                                                                                                            
|John Dean Harper          |                                                                                                                                                                                            
|                          | Interim Chief Accounting Officer                                                                                                                                                           
|Date:  September 20, 2016 |                                                                                                                                                                                            
|                          |
Exhibit 99

CONSOLIDATED NATURAL GAS COMPANY
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED EARNINGS STATEMENT
(Unaudited)



|                                                                                       | Twelve Months
EndedJune 30, 2004
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------
|                                                                                       | (millions)                      
|Operating Revenue                                                                      | $5,881                          
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Operating Expenses                                                                     | 4,495                           
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Income from operations                                                                 | 1,386                           
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Other income                                                                           | 16                              
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Interest and related charges                                                           | 157                             
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Income before income taxes                                                             | 1,245                           
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Income taxes                                                                           | 458                             
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Income before cumulative effect of a change in
     Accounting principle               | 787                             
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle
     (net of income taxes of $5) | (6)                             
|                                                                                       |                                 
|Net income                                                                             | $   781                         

The condensed consolidated earnings statement for the twelve months ended June 30, 2004 reflects the adoption of a new accounting standard, effective December 31, 2003, FASB Interpretation No. 46 (revised December 2003), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, for its interests in special purpose entities.
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 228 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2141 Ferry Street in Anderson, California, 

as the ‘‘Norma Comnick Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 228 EH

1 SECTION 1. NORMA COMNICK POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 2141 Ferry Street in Anderson, 

4 California, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Norma 

5 Comnick Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Norma Comnick Post 

10 Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 2022. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 228 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postfice Building’’. son, California, as the ‘‘Norma Comnick Post Of- al Service located at 2141 Ferry Street in Ander-
#### Minta B. SLATON, Appellant, v. George R. SLATON, Appellee.

No. 70-1015.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 5, 1971.

Rehearing Denied April 27, 1971.

R. T. Shankweiler, of Patterson, Maloney & Frazier, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Thomas B. Mimms, Jr., of Fleming, O’Bryan & Fleming, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The issue presented on this interlocutory appeal is whether or not the trial judge committed error in denying a motion to compel answers to certain questions put to the appellee in the course of his deposition. The record, the briefs, and the oral argument leave us with the view that no abuse of discretion has been demonstrated. The order appealed from is, therefore, affirmed.

WALDEN, REED and MAGER, JJ., concur.
#### Kenneth Walter HOPPER and John Robert Bradlee, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 71-132, 71-151.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 17, 1972.

Charles W. Musgrove, Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellants.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Andrew I. Freidrich, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the briefs and record on appeal and heard oral argument. On the basis thereof, we are of the opinion that no reversible error has been made to clearly appear. The judgment appealed from is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, OWEN, and MAGER, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 35.1

VW Credit, Inc. Servicer Compliance Statement Under Section 3.9 of the Sale and Servicing

Agreement and Item 1123 of Regulation AB

VOLKSWAGEN AUTO LOAN ENHANCED TRUST 2010-1

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of VW
Credit, Inc. (VCI), as Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 28, 2010 (as amended and supplemented, or otherwise modified and in effect from time to time, the Sale and Servicing Agreement),
by and among Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2010-1, as Issuer, Volkswagen Auto Lease/Loan Underwritten Funding, LLC as Seller, VW Credit, Inc., as Servicer, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Indenture Trustee, does hereby certify
that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012, and of its performance under the Sale and
Servicing Agreement was conducted under my supervision.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects
throughout such period.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate on behalf of the Servicer this
twenty-second day of March, 2013.



/s/ Dr. Christian DahlheimDr. Christian DahlheimExecutive Vice President & CFO
p130135.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 13-0135 Focus Ready Draft 12/13/2012

ENGINEER: Prothero \ REC PV (kg/yr):

Page 1p130135.eng

SAT (concerns) (12/07/2012):

Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P2B3T2 . Health: 1-2 Dermal, Drinking Water, Inhalation Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 1.00 ppb)

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 2-3A

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 13-0135

Page 2p130135.eng

Page 3p130135.eng

Page 4p130135.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 13-0135

Page 5p130135.eng

Page 6