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

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 3, 2015

NO. 03

- 15

- 00133

- CR

Jerry Alexander, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICE S GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the tr i a l court. Having reviewed

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.

### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 3, 2015

NO. 03

- 15

- 00134

- CR

Jerry Alexander, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICE S GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the tr i a l court. Having reviewed

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.

### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 3, 2015

NO. 03

- 15

- 00135

- CR

Jerry Alexander, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICE S GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the tr i a l court. Having reviewed

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

COMMISSIONERS: Lina M. Khan, Chair

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter 

Christine S. Wilson

Alvaro M. Bedoya

RESOLUTION DIRECTING USE OF COMPULSORY PROCESS TO COLLECT 

INFORMATION REGARDING SOCIAL MEDIA AND VIDEO STREAMING 

PLATFORMS’ REVIEW AND MONITORING OF COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING TO 

DETECT, PREVENT, AND REDUCE DECEPTIVE ADVERTISEMENTS, INCLUDING 

RELATED TO FRAUDULENT HEALTH-CARE PRODUCTS, FINANCIAL SCAMS, 

AND THE SALE OF FAKE GOODS

File No. P224500

Nature and Scope of Investigation:

To collect information regarding Social Media and Video Streaming Platforms’ policies, 

procedures, and practices to detect, prevent, and reduce deceptive commercial advertising, 

including advertisements related to health fraud, financial scams, and the sale of fake goods, and 

the Platforms’ measures to ensure that commercial advertising on the platforms is identifiable as 

advertising to consumers.

Social Media and Video Streaming Platforms — which offer robust ad creation and 

targeting tools — may provide unique opportunities for fraudulent marketers to reach consumers. 

The blurring of commercial and noncommercial messages on the Platforms also can make it 

difficult for consumers to recognize advertising and other commercial messages. Accordingly, 

the Commission intends to study how such Platforms scrutinize and limit advertising that may 

increase consumers’ exposure to a range of unlawful advertising and frauds, including fraudulent 

health-care products, financial scams, and fake goods. The Commission also will study the 

means such Platforms may use to aid consumers in distinguishing advertising or other 

commercial messages from other types of content on those platforms. 

The Federal Trade Commission hereby resolves and directs that any and all compulsory 

process available to it be used in connection with this inquiry.
Authority to Conduct Investigation: 

Sections 6, 9, 10, and 20 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 46, 49, 50, 

and 57b-1, as amended; and FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice, 16 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 et seq., and 

supplements thereto. 

By direction of the Commission. 

April J. Tabor 

Secretary

Issued: March 16, 2023 

2
**Exhibit 35**

Servicer Compliance Statement 

I, Andrew D. Widner, Vice President of PNC Bank, NationalAssociation (successor to National City Bank) (the “Servicer”), and, in such capacity, the officer in charge of the Servicer’s responsibility under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 1995, as amended andsupplemented (the “Agreement”), hereby certify that: 

1. A review of the Servicer’s activities for the period commencingJanuary 1, 2011 and ending December 31, 2011 and of the Servicer’s performance under the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision; and 

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

[Signature Page to Follow] 

March 27, 2012 

PNC Bank, National Association, successor to

National City Bank, as Servicer
/s/ Andrew D. WidnerBy: Andrew D. Widner, Vice President
No. 00-499.

#### Thomas et al. *v.*Anchorage Equal Rights Commission et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION FOR EN BANC RECONSIDERATION

Appellate case name: In the Interest of R.S.

Appellate case number: 01-18-00058-CV

Trial court case number: 16-1394-F425

Trial court: 425th District Court of Williamson County

Party filing motion: Appellant

It is ordered that the motion for en banc reconsideration is DENIED. 

Judge’s signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd___________________________

 Acting for the Court

The en banc court consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes, Lloyd, Kelly, Landau, 

Goodman, Hightower, Countiss, and Adams.

Date: December 3, 2020
CHARLTON DEWAYNE
LAURAMORE

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 13

- 2173

_____________________________/

Opinion filed February 11, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Baker County

. Thomas M. Jaworski , Judge

.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Danielle Jorden, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee , for Appellan t.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate , Criminal Appeals Bureau Chief, and Jess ica DaSilva, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MARSTILLER and RAY

, JJ

., and TERRELL, TERRY D.

, ASSOCIATE JUDG E

, CONCUR.
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                      ----------




                      STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
         PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE



     Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the
     undersigned, Joseph Mazin, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
     Officer, and Chief Financial Officer of The Flamemaster Corporation (the
     "Company"), hereby certifies that:

     1)   The Company's Form 10-QSB Quarterly Report for the period ended
          December 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
          of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1924; 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:  February 9, 2004                              /s/ JOSEPH MAZIN
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Chairman of the Board and
                                                     Chief Executive Officer and
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    UT
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000,000
<CIK>                                        0000037637
<NAME>                                       FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION
       
<S>                                                    <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                           MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          3-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                                           PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                                  3,526
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                                  231
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       489
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                                       0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                                83
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             4,329
<COMMON>                                                   1,004
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                                      0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                          814
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                             1,818
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                   34
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                       1,297
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                             0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                                56
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                                  1
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                      0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                                    0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                               0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                             1,123
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                              4,329
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                                    554
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                          22
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                   466
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                   488
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                       66
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                            (1)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                                65
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      24
<NET-INCOME>                                                  41
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                    0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                                 41
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                      48
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                      0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                       116
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0.00
        





</TABLE>
#### Mrs. James E. KELLY, Jr., Individually, etc., et al. v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY et al.

No. 61505.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 30, 1978.

Motion and Order to Dismiss

On motion of Mrs. James E. Kelly, Jr., individually and as curatrix of the estate of the interdict, James E. Kelly, Jr., as well as individually and as administratrix of the estate of the minor children, James E. Kelly, III and Tracy Kelly, and on suggesting to the Court that the captioned case has been compromised between all parties to this litigation; and on further suggesting to the Court that it unfortunately renders the granting of the writ by this Honorable Court moot; and accordingly, the appeal should be dismissed. IT IS ORDERED that the appeal of Mrs. James E. Kelly, Jr., individually and as curatrix of the estate of the interdict, James E. Kelly, Jr., as well as individually and as administratrix of the estate of the minor children, James E. Kelly, III and Tracy Kelly, be and the same is hereby dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         856,233
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,734
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     34,286
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               909,253
<PP&E>                                          48,565
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,773)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 953,045
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          682,349
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        25,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     245,695
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   953,045
<SALES>                                         67,238
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                68,680
<CGS>                                           17,200
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,200
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                49,967
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,513
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,513
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,513
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 12-1

                           FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION

                STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF CONSOLIDATED RATIO OF
              EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES AND COMBINED FIXED CHARGES
                                    ($000'S)
                                    UNAUDITED

                                                                       3 months
                                                                         2001
EARNINGS:

Net earnings                                                           $  8,105
Taxes on income                                                           2,402
Total fixed charges                                                      24,037
Capitalized interest                                                       (130)
Capitalized interest amortized                                              606
Equity earnings of non-consolidated associated
        companies accounted for by the equity
        method, net of dividends                                         (2,782)
                                                                       --------

                                                                       $ 32,238
                                                                       ========
FIXED CHARGES:

Interest expense (includes dividend on preferred security of $3,937)   $ 20,765
Capitalized interest                                                        130
Imputed interest on non-capitalized lease payment                         3,142
                                                                       --------

                                                                       $ 24,037
                                                                       ========
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                                         1.34
                                                                           ====



Note: There were no preferred shares outstanding during the period indicated
and, therefore, the consolidated ratio of earnings to fixed charges and combined
fixed charges and preferred share dividend requirements would have been the same
as the consolidated ratio of earnings to fixed charges and combined fixed
charges for the period indicated.



<PAGE>
FTC’s Proposed Partial Stipulated Order for 

Permanent Injunction and Monetary Judgment

Attachment 1B

Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 1607-2 Filed 06/28/16 Page 1 of 2
State Region

Alabama SE

Alaska Pacific NW

Arizona Desert SW

Arkansas SW

California California

Colorado Mountain

Connecticut Eastern

Delaware Eastern

District of Columbia Eastern

Florida SE

Georgia SE

Hawaii California

Idaho Pacific NW

Illinois Central

Indiana Central

Iowa Midwest

Kansas Midwest

Kentucky Central

Louisiana SW

Maine New England

Maryland Eastern

Massachusetts New England

Michigan Central

Minnesota Midwest

Mississippi SE

Missouri Central

Montana Mountain

Nebraska Midwest

Nevada Desert SW

New Hampshire New England

New Jersey Eastern

New Mexico Mountain

New York Eastern

North Carolina SE

North Dakota Midwest

Ohio Central

Oklahoma SW

Oregon Pacific NW

Pennsylvania Eastern

Rhode Island New England

South Carolina SE

South Dakota Midwest

Tennessee SE

Texas SW

Utah Pacific NW

Vermont New England

Virginia Eastern

Washington Pacific NW

West Virginia Eastern

Wisconsin Central

Wyoming Mountain

Puerto Rico Eastern

Attachment 1B: NADA Region List

Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 1607-2 Filed 06/28/16 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2385

RAMONA CLAIRE OSBORN; JOHN HENRY OSBORN, II; ROBERTA LYNN 

OSBORN,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. 

(1:13-cv-02159-RDB)

Submitted: February 20, 2014 Decided: February 25, 2014

Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ramona Claire Osborn, John Henry Osborn, II, and Roberta Lynn 

Osborn, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ramona Claire Osborn, John Henry Osborn, II, and 

Roberta Lynn Osborn appeal the district court’s order denying 

relief on their civil complaint. We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Osborn v. United States, 

No. 1:13-cv-02159-RDB (D. Md. Sept. 30, 2013). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       2,111,624
<SECURITIES>                                 6,676,943
<RECEIVABLES>                                  590,846
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,000
<INVENTORY>                                    881,947
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,359,392
<PP&E>                                         931,541
<DEPRECIATION>                                 868,478
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,501,682
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          253,317
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,098
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,843,840
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,501,682
<SALES>                                      1,883,940
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,492,768
<CGS>                                          976,546
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,574,151
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                44,040
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                874,577
<INCOME-TAX>                                   326,674
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            547,903
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   547,903
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .34


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-8592
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus THOMAS G. RUTHERS, II, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge. (CR-88-62-K, CA-95-157) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 16, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas G. Ruthers, II, Appellant Pro Se. William David Wilmoth, United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Ruthers , No. CR-88-62-K; CA-95-157 (N.D.W. Va. Dec. 6, 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
#### Ernest Jackson COTTLE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 69-555.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Sept. 23, 1969.

Habeas corpus denied.
|   | (1) | the      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 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:  March      12, 2009 | /s/      Donald W. Barney                             |
|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 | Donald      W. Barney                                 |
|                                 | President,      Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |
|                                 |                                                  |