alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10
- 18
- 00159
- CR ANDREW LEE JONES, JR
. , Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 85th District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 16
- 04190
- CRF
- 85

ABATEMENT ORDER
This appeal was abated to the trial court to hold a hearing regarding correcting inaccuracies, if any, in the reporter’s record. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 34.6(e)(2). After a hearing, the reporter’s record was corrected and, as corrected, was filed with this C ourt on December 3, 2018. An exhibit, however, was not filed. The exhibit, offered both as Motion to Suppress Exhibit 2 1 and as State’s Exhibit 4, an in

- car video, could not be

1 The parties at the abatement hearing and at the motion to suppress hearing refer to this Exhibit as Motion to Suppress Exhibit 2. However, it is labeled in the Exhibit volume as Motion to Suppress Exhibit 1. T he Court lacks the in

- car video that was intr oduced.Jones v. State Page 2

converted by the reporter to be electronically filed with this Court. By order issued on January 2, 2019, the appeal was reinstated, and the reporter was ordered to provide the Court with a DVD containing a copy of the in

- car video admitted into evidence as Motion to Suppress Exhibit 2 and as State’s Exhibit 4 within 14 days from the date of the Order. The copy was ordered to be in a format that would allow the Court to view the video using industry standard video software rather than any type of proprietary software. The next day, the reporter filed a “corrected” record

. With it , Motion to Suppress Exhibit 1, an audio

- only exhibit , was uploaded into our case - management system, TAMES, as Motion to Suppress Exhibit 2. State’s Exhibit 4 (the in

- car video) was copied

onto a CD and sent to the Court. 2 The disc was not viewab le by the Court. The State
informed the Court that the disc should be viewable through a computer with Windows 10. The Court does not use Windows 10. Further, the dis c was not viewable on even a personal computer with Windows 10. Accordingly, this appeal is ABATED to the trial court to, within 21 days from t he date of this Order, oversee the filing of a copy of State’s Exhibit 4 in a format that is
viewable after it has been uploaded/filed via the clerk/reporter portal into the Court’s cases management software, a.k.a. TAMES. If this is functionally impractical to accomplish, then the trial court is ordered to oversee the transfer of State’s Exhibit 4 to a

2 The Court was also given a CD of “Motion to Suppress Exhibit 2.” However it is also the audio exhibit admitted as Motion to Suppress Exhibit 1, not the in

- car video admitted both as Motion to Suppress Exhibit 2 and State’s Exhibit 4. Because of continuing confusion as to what Motion to Suppress Exhibit 2 should contain, this order will only pertain to State’s Exhibit 4.Jones v. State Page 3

format that i s viewable on any modern DVD player or computer drive without any other proprietary software and labeled to identify the specific software needed to view the file

.

PER CURIAM Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis , and Justice Neill Appeal ab ated Order issued and filed April 17 , 2019
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, BALANCE SHEETS, STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' 
EQUITY AND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY 
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>     1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           9,723
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,892
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,174)
<INVENTORY>                                     21,534
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                70,597
<PP&E>                                          27,425
<DEPRECIATION>                                (17,334)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  95,113
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,122
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        84,460
<OTHER-SE>                                    (28,277)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    95,113
<SALES>                                         99,881
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               100,851
<CGS>                                           34,887
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   97,425
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    82
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 643
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,865
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,016
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,849
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,849
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                           SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION*
     (Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer)

         Pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.ss.  1350,  as  created  by  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of WindsorTech, Inc. hereby
certify, to such officers' knowledge, that:

         (1) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of WindsorTech,
Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report")
fully complies with the with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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: November 12, 2003                              /s/ Marc Sherman
      -----------------                              --------------------------
                                                     Marc Sherman
                                                     Chairman of the Board and
                                                     Chief Executive Officer

                                                     /s/ Edward L. Cummings
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Edward L. Cummings
                                                     Chief Financial Officer


__________________
* The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section
18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### Juan FLORES v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT.

No. 38321.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1969.

Habeas Corpus denied without opinion.
Exhibit 99.2
                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                       ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
         SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Del Global Technologies Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended November 2, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas
V. Gilboy, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 that to my knowledge:
   (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
       the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
   (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
       respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
       Company.



                                          /s/  Thomas V. Gilboy
                                          -------------------------
                                          Name: Thomas V. Gilboy
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          Date: December 17, 2002












                                          1


<PAGE>
FTC Form 232 (rev 7/11)

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20580

CASE NAME FILE/DOCKET NUMBER

Pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, I (we) am (are) entering in the above 

proceeding the appearance of

□ counsel supporting the complaint (Complete Items 1, 3, 4, and 5 below)

□ counsel or representative for the respondent (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below)

□ counsel or representative for a third party (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below)

1. COUNSEL OR REPRESENTATIVE 2. RESPONDENT(S) OR THIRD PARTY(IES)

Include the name, address, email address, and telephone 

number of each counsel or representative entering an 

appearance in the above proceeding,

Include the address and telephone numbers of all persons, 

partnerships, corporations, or associations on whose behalf 

this Notice of Appearance is being filed.

3. ASSOCIATE/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

4. SIGNATURE OF SENIOR COUNSEL 5. DATE SIGNED

Return this form to: Federal Trade Commission

Room H-113

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Steven Mojo (Executive Director)

 exec.director@bpiworld.org

Biodegradable Products Inst (BPI)

888c 8th Ave #141

New York, NY 10019

Phone Number: 774-521-3202

Fax Number: 508-858-0608

ECM BioFilms, Inc. et al. 11/13/2014

Steven Mojo (Executive Director)

 exec.director@bpiworld.org

Biodegradable Products Inst (BPI)

888c 8th Ave #141

New York, NY 10019

Phone Number: 774-521-3202

Fax Number: 508-858-0608

D09358 (Katherine Johnson)

11 13 2014
Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on November 13, 2014, a copy of the foregoing Motion For Cost 

Reimbursement was served by overnight courier delivery on: 

Jonathan Emord 

jemord@emord.com

Emord & Associates, P.C. 

11808 Wolf Rune Lane 

Clifton, VA 20124 

Phone Number: 202-466-6937 

Fax Number: 202-466-6938 

Peter Arhangelsky 

parhangelsky@emord.com 

Lou Caputo 

lcaputo@emord.com 

Emord & Associates, P.C. 

3210 S Gilbert Rd Ste 4 

Emord & Associates, P.C. 

Chandler, AZ 85286 

Phone Number: 602-388-8899 

Fax Number: 602-393-4361 

Donald S. Clark 

Office of the Secretary 

Federal Trade Commission 

Room 172 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20580 

D. Michael Chappell 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Federal Trade Commission 

Room H-113 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20580
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-19-00202-CV

IN RE TREATMENT EQUIPMENT 

COMPANY, JANICE V. SMITH, AND 

BRUCE S. SMITH

§

§

§

§

§

Original Proceeding 

From the Probate Court

of Denton County (PR-2014-00697-01)

July 23, 2019

Opinion by Justice Womack

JUDGMENT

This court conditionally grants, in part, the relief requested in relators 

Treatment Equipment Company, Janice V. Smith, and Bruce S. Smith’s petition for 

writ of mandamus. We order the trial court to vacate the parts of its June 3, 2019 

order (1) ordering relators to respond to the improper requests for production listed 

and referred to in the order and (2) overruling relators’ objections to requests for 

production 18 through 22. 
We order real party in interest Phillip E. Romero, as Independent Executor of 

the Estate of Michael Kilborn, to pay the costs of this original proceeding. 

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Dana Womack

 Justice Dana Womack
Prepared by R.R. Donnelley Financial -- EX-10.6




 Exhibit 10.6         

July 30, 2004 
 Lee Chen, 

I am pleased to confirm the offer for you to join RAKSHA Networks, Inc., a California corporation (the “Company”), as its CEO at our
San Jose headquarters. This is a full-time permanent position. You will be reporting to the President of the Company. 
 Your starting
salary will be zero U.S. dollars. 
 You will be granted options or the opportunity to purchase the Company’s Common Stock for certain
amount to be discussed, subject to the terms and conditions of the Company’s 2004 Stock Plan. Generally speaking, those terms will include, in your case, among other things, vesting as to 1/4 of the shares after 1 year of employment, and an
additional 1/48th of the shares at the end of each additional month thereafter. 
 Your starting date will be August 25, 2004. Please
confirm your acceptance by signing a copy of this letter below and confirming your first date of employment 
 I look forward to a favorable
reply and to welcoming you to RAKSHA Networks, Inc. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	 /s/ Lee Chen

	Lee Chen
	President


  

			
	Acknowledged and Accepted:
	
	 /s/ Lee Chen

	 Lee Chen

		
	Date:	 	 8/4/2004



			
		
	Start Date:	 	 8/25/2004
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, 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

January 9, 2009 

1215 

Order 

 

January 9, 2009 

137550 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137550 

 COA: 286928 

Jackson CC: 05-001235-FC 

ROBERT SCOTT REASTER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 1, 2008 

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. 

 HATHAWAY, J., not participating.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 8777]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4722]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-33,008]


Dudley Apparel Dudley, Georgia; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on December 9, 1996 in response to a worker petition 
which was filed on behalf of workers at Dudley Apparel, Dudley, 
Georgia.
    This case is being terminated because no information is available 
from petitioners or company official to complete the necessary 
investigation. Consequently, further investigation in this case would 
serve no purpose; and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 11th day of February, 1997.
Russell T. Kile,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-4722 Filed 2-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9093]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4624]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180

[PP-5F4578/R2277A; FRL-5590-4]
RIN 2070-AB78


Glufosinate Ammonium; Tolerances for Residues

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is correcting the table under Sec. 180.473, paragraph (c) 
to reflect the tolerance for residues of glufosinate ammonium on corn, 
field, forage as stated in the petition submitted by AgrEvo USA Co.

DATES: This correction is effective on February 5, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Joanne Miller, Product 
Manager (PM) 23, Registration Division, (7505C), Office of Pesticide 
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, 
DC 20460. Office location, telephone number, and e-mail address: Rm. 
237, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202, 703-305-
7830, e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bbd6d2d7d7dec995d1d4dad5d5defbdecbdad6dad2d795decbda95dcd4cd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bed3d7d2d2dbcc90d4d1dfd0d0dbfedbcedfd3dfd7d290dbcedf90d9d1c8">[email protected]</span></a>.
    In FR Doc. 97-2838, appearing at page 5333 in the issue for 
Wednesday, February 5, 1997, on page 5338, in Sec. 180.473, in the 
table to paragraph (c), the entry for ``corn, field, forage,'' is 
corrected as follows:


Sec. 180.473  Glufosinate ammonium; tolerances for residues.

*    *    *    *    *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Parts per                   
                 Commodity                   million       Expiration   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        *    *    *    *    *                           
Corn, field, forage......................      4.0       July 13, 1999  
                        *    *    *    *    *                           
------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in Part 180

    Environmental protection.

    Dated: February 18, 1997.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 97-4624 Filed 2-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Royston P. TURNBAUGH, Relator, v. Hon. A. J. HOSEMAN, Jr., Respondent.

No. 72-849.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 25, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 14, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Writ denied.
#### Preston L. NICHOLS v. Lillie Frank NICHOLS.

No. 47049.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 19, 1973.

Scales & Scales, Derek E. Parker, Jackson, for appellant. William Ward, Starkville, for appellee.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Oktibbeha County; Lenore L. Prather, Chancellor.

Before GILLESPIE, C. J., and PATTERSON, INZER, SMITH and ROBERTSON, JJ.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

                            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 Cementitious  Materials,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the year ending  December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Edward
F. Cowle,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certifies to the best of his
knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
     Company.


/s/   EDWARD F. COWLE
---------------------------------
Edward F. Cowle
Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2004


     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906, or
     other document  authenticating,  acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the
     signature that appears in typed form within the electronic  version of this
     written  statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
     the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its
     staff upon  request.  The foregoing  certifications  are  accompanying  the
     Company's Form 10-KSB 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 being filed as part of the Form 10-KSB
     or as a separate disclosure document.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2798
In Re: EDWARD R. BUTLER, Debtor.

_________________________ EDWARD R. BUTLER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT B. SCARLETT, Defendant - Appellee.

No. 95-2808
In Re: EDWARD R. BUTLER, Debtor.

_________________________ EDWARD R. BUTLER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus2 ROBERT B. SCARLETT, Defendant - Appellee, TERRY L. MUSIKA, U. S. Trustee, Trustee - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-2192-H, CA-95-2217-H, BK-90-3087-5-JS) Submitted: March 19, 1996 Decided: March 28, 1996 Before HAMILTON, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward R. Butler, Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen Howard Meredith, ILIF & MEREDITH, P.C., Baltimore, Maryland; Terry L. Musika, UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders dismissing as untimely his appeals from the bankruptcy court's orders and denying his motions for reconsideration. Appellant moved for a stay of all action on these appeals pending the outcome of an unrelated adversary proceeding. Because any decision in that case will notaffect these appeals, we deny Appellant's motions for a stay. Appellee Scarlett moved to dismiss these appeals as untimely; however, Appellant timely noted his appeals from the district court's orders. Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a). Therefore, we deny Appellee Scarlett's motions to dismiss the appeals. We have reviewed the records and the district court's opinions and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Butler v. Scarlett, Nos. CA-95-2192-H; CA-95-2217-H (D. Md. Aug. 17, 1995; Sept. 18 & 19, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Helps more patients

connect with eye care 

professionals and 

supports category growth

Serves growing 

consumer preference

for more convenient

access to eye health 

services and products

Supports our imperative 

to pursue transformative 

approaches to eye health

Advancing

O U R V I S I O N

1