alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00168-CV

In re Amber Dankert and Theresa Howard

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM BELL COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relators Amber Dankert and Theresa Howard have filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus complaining of a decision by respondent Manuel De La Rosa, Village Administrator, 

Village of Salado, Texas, not to strike from the ballot the name of a candidate for alderman 

despite allegedly fatal defects in the candidate’s application for a place on the ballot. Together 

with their petition, which seeks a writ directing De La Rosa to strike the candidate’s name 

from the ballot, relators have filed a motion for emergency relief, requesting “emergency 

consideration” of their petition in light of the looming election. Having reviewed the petition

and the record provided, we dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction and dismiss the motion 

as moot. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

Standing implicates our subject-matter jurisdiction, and thus our power to 

decide the merits of this dispute. In re Osborn, No. 03-13-00314-CV, 2013 WL 2157712, at *1 

(Tex. App.—Austin May 15, 2013, no pet.) (citing Texas Ass’n of Bus. v. Texas Air Control Bd., 
2

852 S.W.2d 440, 445 (Tex.1993)). Generally, challenges to the eligibility of candidates “are 

matters of public concern” and must be prosecuted by the state. Id. (citing Allen v. Fisher, 

9 S.W.2d 731, 732 (Tex.1928)). Consequently, a voter having no special interest cannot bring 

suit seeking the removal of an ineligible candidate. Id. (citing Allen, 9 S.W.2d at 732). Here, 

relators in their petition give no indication of any interest distinct from that of the general public

such as would confer standing.

Relators bear the burden of demonstrating their entitlement to mandamus relief. 

See In re Ford Motor Co., 165 S.W.3d 315, 317 (Tex.2005) (per curiam) (orig. proceeding); 

Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex.1992) (orig. proceeding). Because relators here 

have failed to assert or demonstrate facts establishing their standing to bring this action, we 

conclude that they have not demonstrated this Court’s jurisdiction to provide the relief sought, 

and we accordingly dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction, and dismiss the motion as moot.

__________________________________________

Chari L. Kelly, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Kelly

Filed: March 14, 2024
1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

COMMISSIONERS: Deborah Platt Majoras, Chairman

Thomas B. Leary

Pamela Jones Harbour

Jon Leibowitz

________________________________________________

In the Matter of |

|

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY N.V. |

a foreign corporation, |

|

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY, | Docket No. 9300

a corporation, and |

|

PITT-DES MOINES, INC., |

a corporation. |

 |

________________________________________________|

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART RESPONDENTS’ MOTION

FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF MATERIAL PREVIOUSLY

DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL

Respondents Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. and Chicago Bridge & Iron

Company (“CB&I” or “the Respondents”) have filed a Motion for In Camera Treatment of

Material Previously Designated as Confidential in Respondents’ Further Briefing on Specific

Remedy Issues (“the Motion”). CB&I seeks in camera treatment for discussions on pages 8-11

of Respondents’ Further Briefing on Specific Remedy Issues (“Respondents’ Brief”) that were

redacted in the public record version of Respondents’ Brief. CB&I seeks in camera treatment of

these materials for a period of five years. Complaint Counsel does not oppose Respondents’

motion.

The Commission finds that CB&I has satisfied the standard set forth in Commission Rule

3.45(b) and shown that the disclosure of the information for which it seeks in camera treatment

would likely result in “clearly defined, serious injury.” 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b). See H.P. Hood &

Sons, Inc., 58 F.T.C. 1184, 1188 (1961); Bristol-Myers Co., 90 F.T.C. 455, 456 (1977); General
2

Foods Corp., 95 F.T.C. 352, 355 (1980). The Commission, however, is not persuaded that in

camera treatment should be granted for the five-year period requested by CB&I. The

information for which such treatment is being granted is temporal in nature, and its competitive

sensitivity is likely to diminish over time. Accordingly, the Commission believes that a two-year

period is appropriate.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that those portions of pages 8-11 that were redacted in

the public record in Respondents’ Brief shall be afforded in camera treatment for a period of two

years from the date of this Order, at which time Respondents may show cause why those

materials should not be made public.

By the Commission.

Donald S. Clark

Secretary

SEAL

ISSUED: August 24, 2005
May 7, 2010

By e-mail: expartecommunications@hq.doe.gov

Daniel Cohen Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and Regulatory Law

Office of the General Counsel Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585

– 0121

Re: Ex Parte Memorandum

Dear Mr. Cohen:

On Wednesday, May 5, 2010, representatives from various signatories to the consensus
agreement 1 met with representatives from the Department of Energy. Advocates for the consensus agreement urged the Department of Energy to adopt the entire agreement, except provisions relating to building codes which require congressional action. The parties also discussed the need to develop effective enforcement mechanisms in general, and in particular if the Department of Energy decides to adopt regional standards for the residential heating and cooling systems covered by the consensus agreement.

Advocates for the consensus agreement included Kit Kennedy and Kate Houren of the Natural Resources Defense Council; Tim Ballo of Earthjustice; Andrew deLaski of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project; Steve Nadel of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy; Karen Meyers of Rheem Manufacturing Company; Karim Amrane, Joseph Mattingly and David Calabrese of the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute; John Mandyck of Carrier Corporation; Jeffrey Harris of the Alliance to Save Energy; Jim VerShaw of Trane International, Incorporated ; two representatives of Lennox International, Incorporated ; and Dennis Beck of the California Energy Commission (by phone).

Representatives from the Department of Energy included Scott Blake Harris, Stephanie Weiner

, Roland Risser

, Bryan Miller, and Michael McCabe, in addition to three other representatives who arrived after the meeting introductions were completed.

Respectfully submitted,

1 Agreement on Legislative and Regulatory Strategy for Amending Federal Energy Efficiency Standards, Test Procedures, Metrics and Building Code Provisions for Residential Air Conditioners, Heat Pumps, Weatherized and Non-Weatherized Furnaces and Related Matters, Oct. 13, 2009, at http://aceee.org/buildings/Furnace-ACAgreement.pdf

.Kate Houren

Legal Fellow*

Natural Resources Defense Council 1200 New York Ave., NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 513- 6267 khouren@nrdc.org

* Admitted to practice in New York, not yet admitted to practice in Washington, DC
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Cubic Corporation (the “Corporation”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,William W. Boyle, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCorporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to myknowledge:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/  W. W. Boyle                                    |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| W.  W. Boyle                                        |   |
| Senior  Vice President, and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                                                |   |
| Date:  February 8, 2010                        |   |

 

----
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE FEDERAL. TRADE COMMISSION

In the Matter of

LIBBEY INC., a corporation,
Docket No. 9301
and

NEWELL RUBBERMALD, INC., a corporauon

Net et ae

ORDER DESIGNATING ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE

Pursuant to authority vested in Lhe Federal ‘Frade Commission ard delegated to che Chief
Administrative Law Judge,

IT TS ORDERED that D. Michael Chappell, an administrative law judge of this
Commussion, be, and he hereby is, designated and appointed to take testimony and receive
evidense in this proceeding and to perzorm all other duties authorized by law.

lames P. Timony
Chief Administrative Law Judge

Date: May 10, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                              THIS   SCHEDULE    CONTAINS   SUMMARY    FINANCIAL
                              INFORMATION    EXTRACTED    FROM   THE   FINANCIAL
                              STATEMENTS AS OF March 31,1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
                              ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<CIK>                                                 863557
<NAME>                        SWIFT TRANSPORTATION CO., INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                          1,000
<CURRENCY>                                       US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1
<CASH>                                                5,042
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        87,075
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                           3,575
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    117,011
<PP&E>                                              382,073
<DEPRECIATION>                                       99,661
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      409,742
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                62,046
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                                 42
<OTHER-SE>                                          233,606
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        409,742
<SALES>                                             156,074
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    156,074
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       144,951
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       (171)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      813
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      10,481
<INCOME-TAX>                                          4,250
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   6,231
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                          6,231
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           .14
        
<FN>
EPS-PRIMARY  and  EPS-DILUTED  are  restated to include the impact of  Financial
Accounting  Standards  Board Statement No. 128 and the effect of a 3-for-2 stock
split payable on March 12,1998.
</FN>

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1
                          ODYSSEY PICTURES CORPORATION
                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 Annual  Report of  Odyssey  Pictures  Corporation  (the
Company)  on Form  10-K/A for the period  ended June 30,  2003 as filed with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  Report),  I, John
Foster,  Chief  Executive  Officer and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350,  as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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.

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Odyssey  Pictures  Corporation  and will be  retained  by  Odyssey
Pictures  Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.

October 23, 2003

/s/ John Foster
---------------------------
John Foster
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


                                                                Page
                                                                ----

Bradley Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiaries


     Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants          F-2


     Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 1999 and 1998   F-3


     Consolidated Statements of Income for the
     Years Ended December 31, 1999 and 1998                      F-5


     Consolidated Statement of Shareholders' Equity for the
     Years Ended December 31, 1999 and 1998                      F-6


     Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the
     Years Ended December 31, 1999 and 1998                      F-7


     Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements               F-8 - F-24





































             REPORT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



Board of Directors and Shareholders
    Bradley Pharmaceuticals, Inc.


We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Bradley
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and
the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity and cash
flows for the years then ended.  These financial statements are the respon-
sibility of the Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.
An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial state-
ment presentation.  We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for
our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Bradley
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and the
consolidated results of their operations, and their consolidated shareholders'
equity and their consolidated cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.




GRANT THORNTON LLP

Edison, New Jersey
February 23, 2000
Exhibit 32(a)


               CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                             (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dataram Corporation, a New Jersey
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31,
2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),
John H. Freeman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his 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 result of operations of the Company.



March 12, 2009                      /s/ John H. Freeman
                                   _____________________________________
                                   John H. Freeman
                                   President and Chief Executive Officer

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Dataram Corporation and will be retained by Dataram
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.]
**Exhibit 32.1**

**SECTION 906CERTIFICATION**

In accordance with Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Registranthereby certifies to his knowledge that this annual report of Registrant on Form 10-K forthe year ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained inthis annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Registrant. 

| Date: May 19, 2006 | /s/ Daniel Glassman                                                  Daniel Glassman                                                  Chairman of the Board, President and                                                  Chief Executive Officer                                                  (Principal Executive Officer) |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

A signed original of this writtenstatement or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this writtenstatement has been provided to Bradley Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained byBradley Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request. 

The foregoing certification is beingfurnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not beingfiled as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.
#### James R. YINGER, Appellant, v. RAUHUT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 73-11.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 29, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

COMMISSIONERS: Deborah Platt Majoras, Chairman

Thomas B. Leary

Pamela Jones Harbour

Jon Leibowitz

___________________________________________

 )

In the Matter of )

 )

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY N.V., )

a foreign corporation, )

 )

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY, ) Docket No. 9300

a corporation, )

 )

PITT-DES MOINES, INC., )

a corporation. )

___________________________________________)

ORDER APPROVING RESPONDENTS’ APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF

MONITOR TRUSTEE AND MONITOR TRUSTEE AGREEMENT

The Commission’s Final Order in this matter required Respondents to retain a Monitor

Trustee within 30 days of the Commission’s Order becoming final. Respondents Chicago Bridge

& Iron filed an Application for Approval of Proposed Monitor Trustee and Monitor Trustee

Agreement on May 26, 2005. On June 3, 2005, Complaint Counsel filed a response indicating

that they do not oppose Respondents’ choice of Monitor Trustee and the Monitor Trustee

Agreement is acceptable. The Commission has decided to approve Respondents’ Application. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT Respondents’ Application to retain Mr. Paul J. Vallero as the

Monitor Trustee in this matter is APPROVED; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Monitor Trustee Agreement executed

between Mr. Vallero and Respondents CB&I is APPROVED.

By the Commission.

Donald S. Clark

Secretary

ISSUED: July 20, 2005
**Exhibit32**

 

THE DAYTON POWERAND LIGHT COMPANY

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

The undersigned officersof The Dayton Power and Light Company (the “Issuer”) hereby certify that theIssuer’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005,which this certificate accompanies, fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that theinformation contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Issuer andwill be retained by the Issuer and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

Signed:

 

 
| /s/ James V. Mahoney |   |   |
|----------------------|--------|--------|
| James V. Mahoney     |   |
|                 |   |
|                 |   |
| /s/ John J.  Gillen  |   |   |
| John J. Gillen       |   |
|                 |   |
|                 |   |
| Date: May 5, 2005    |   |

 

1

----