alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**165**
**KA 12-01601**

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND WHALEN, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DARYL D. WILLIAMS, SR., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

REBECCA CURRIER, AUBURN, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

JON E. BUDELMANN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Cayuga County Court (Thomas G. Leone, J.), rendered July 5, 2012. The judgment revoked the probation component of defendant’s split sentence of incarceration and probation and imposed a lengthier indeterminate term of incarceration.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking the probation component of the split sentence of incarceration and probation previously imposed upon his conviction of robbery in the third degree (Penal Law § 160.05) and sentencing him to a lengthier indeterminate term of incarceration. County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s request for an adjournment of the violation of probation hearing to enable him to obtain a copy of the plea and sentencing transcripts from the underlying conviction ( see People v Strauts , 67 AD3d 1381, 1381, lv denied 14 NY3d 773; see also People v Darryl P. , 105 AD3d 1439, 1440, lv denied 21 NY3d 1041). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the People established by a preponderance of the evidence that he violated the condition of his probation that he abstain from the use of intoxicating beverages ( see People v Flinn , 92 AD3d 1217, 1217-1218, lv denied 18 NY3d 994; People

v Jones , 50 AD3d 1058, 1059, lv denied 10 NY3d 936). The State Trooper who arrested defendant for driving while intoxicated after he crashed his vehicle testified at the hearing that defendant tested positive for alcohol on the preliminary screening device, failed three sobriety tests, and admitted that he purchased beer. Also contrary to defendant’s contention, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.

Entered: February 14, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
# C_2021357EN.01001701.xml

| 6.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 357/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 357/17

---

Order of the President of the Court of 14 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin — Germany) — Wacker Chemie AG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland represented by the Umweltbundesamt

(Case C-76/21) (1)

(2021/C 357/25)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.

---
Order filed, February 05, 2014

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________
NO. 14

- 13

- 00991

- CV

____________
GULF COAST ASPHALT C OMPANY, L.L.C. AND T RIFINERY, INC. , Appellant

V.

RUSSELL T. LLOYD, JO HN M. O’QUINN & ASSO CIATES, L.L.P., AND JOHN M.O’QUINN & ASS OCIATES, P.L.L.C. , Appellee

On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2011

- 61780



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due January 03 , 2014

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court ha s not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record
has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.We order Michelle Tucker , the official court reporter, to file the record in

this appeal within 10 days of the date of this order

.
PER CURIAM
259 La. 753

#### George L. DOSS v. AMERICAN VENTURES, INC., and Travelers Insurance Company.

No. 51592.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 28, 1971.

In re: George L. Doss applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 248 So.2d 358.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue ; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the cases; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
#### CHRYSLER CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, Petitioner, v. Stephen T. DEANS et al., Respondents. WOLFER MOTORS, INC., a Florida corporation, Petitioner, v. Stephen T. DEANS et al., Respondents.

Nos. 73-816, 73-847.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 8, 1974.

William F. McGowan, Jr. of Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, Tampa, for petitioner, Chrysler Corp.

Charles J. Cheves, Jr. of Cheves & Ha-zen, Venice, for petitioner, Wolfer Motors, Inc.

Norman D. Warford, Englewood, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.'

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied under the rationale of Brown, Inc. v. Seminerio, Fla.App.4th, 1971, 246 So.2d 629.

HOBSON, A. C. J„ and BOARDMAN and GRIMES, JJ., concur.
#### Stephen Joseph RYAN, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 44379.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 11, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 5, 1974.

Certiorari denied. 282 So.2d 37.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, J., dissents.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                           5,581
<SECURITIES>                                        91
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,755
<ALLOWANCES>                                       233
<INVENTORY>                                      1,838
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,805
<PP&E>                                           5,943
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,357
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  17,772
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,708
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           599
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,472
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,772
<SALES>                                         11,012
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,012
<CGS>                                            3,447
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,676
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,392
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,256
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,136
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,136
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES v. BALESTRA.

No. 6134.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Jan. 25, 1937.

Charles D. McAvoy, U. S. Atty., and Gerald A. Gleeson and J. Barton Rettew, Jr., Asst. U. S. Attys., all of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

Nazareno Balestra, pro se.

Before BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge, and KIRKPATRICK and MARIS, District Judges.

KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.

This petition for naturalization was filed under the provisions of section 4 of the Act of May 24, 1934, 48 Stat. 797 (8 U.S.C.A. § 368), which amends section 2 of the Act of September 22, 1922, 42 Stat. 1022 (8 U.S.C.A. § 368). The petitioner is an alien who married an American woman, a citizen, in 1926.

The pertinent provision of the act of 1934 is “an alien who marries a citizen of the United States, after the passage of this Act, as here amended [May 24, 1934] * * * may be naturalized” without declaration of intention and upon three years’ residence instead of five.

The act of 1922 as enacted applied only to alien women. Its provision was “any woman who marries a citizen of the United States after the passage of this Act [September 22, 1922] * * * may be naturalized,” etc. Section 2.

The question is whether or not the petitioner’s case comes within the terms of the act of 1934. This depends entirely upon what statute was meant by the phrase “this Act, as here amended.” If those words refer to the act of 1934, as the government contends, the appellee, of course, cannot avail himself of its provisions, since he did not marry after its passage.

*44Concededly “this Act” meant either the act of 1922 or the act of 1934. The phrase “as here amended” was added to indicate which of the two acts Congress had in mind. As the court below pointed out, this description could fit only the act of 1922. It could not refer to the act of 1934 because that act was not “here amended.”

-Against this common sense interpretation, the *government*urges that it involves construing the act'of 1934 retroactively. That may be true, and it is also true that a retroactive construction is usually to be avoided. On the other hand, the rule against such an interpretation is merely a more or less artificial aid in arriving at the true intention of the Legislature, and will not govern if in conflict with the general objectives of the legislation. Now, the purpose of the act of 1934 undoubtedly was to extend to men the privileges which the act of 1922 had already conferred on women aliens, at the same time modifying the rights accorded by fixing the necessary period of residence for all aliens at three years. However, if the construction which the government urges is adopted, the result is that the act of 1922 will be entirely repealed by implication. This was clearly pointed out by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in United States v. Bradley, 83 F.(2d) 483. We agree with that court and adopt the construction that “this Act, as here amended” means the act of 1922.

The 'order of the District Court is affirmed.
H. Res. 516

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

August 18, 1994.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 3433) to provide for the management of portions of the Presidio under the jurisdiction of the Secretary

of the Interior. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed

with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are

waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and the

amendments made in order by this resolution and shall not

exceed seventy-five minutes, with forty-five minutes equally

divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority

member of the Committee on Natural Resources and thirty

minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and

ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and

Means. After general debate the bill shall be considered for

amendment under the five-minute rule for a period not to exceed three hours (excluding time consumed by recorded votes
2

HRES 516 EH

and proceedings incidental thereto). It shall be in order to

consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment

under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of

a substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources now printed in the bill, modified by the amendments

recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means now

printed in the bill and by the amendments printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution.

The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as

modified, shall be considered as read. All points of order

against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as modified, are waived. No amendment directly or

indirectly changing section 3(h)(9), section 3(h)(12), section

3(h)(13), or section 3(j) of the amendment in the nature of

a substitute, as modified, shall be in order. At the conclusion

of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee

shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand

a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in

the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee

amendment in the nature of a substitute, as modified. The

previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill

and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
3

HRES 516 EH

motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.3


                            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 Quarterly Report of Avery Communications, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick
J. Haynes, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 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.


/s/ Patrick J. Haynes, III
----------------------------------
Patrick J. Haynes, III
Chief Executive Officer
September 3, 2002
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 939

To extend the suspension of duty on three-dimensional cameras.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 17, 1993

Mr. BILBRAY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To extend the suspension of duty on three-dimensional

cameras.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON

4 THREE-DIMENSIONAL CAMERAS.

5 Heading 9902.90.06 of the Harmonized Tariff

6 Schedule of the United States is amended by striking out

7 ‘‘12/31/92’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘12/31/96’’.

8 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

9 The amendment made by section 1 applies with re10 spect to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for

11 consumption, after December 31, 1992.
2

HR 939 IH

1 SEC. 3. CERTAIN ENTRIES.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 514 of

3 the Tariff Act of 1930 or any other provision of law, the

4 Secretary of the Treasury, upon proper request filed with

5 the appropriate customs officer within one hundred and

6 eighty days after the date of the enactment of this Act,

7 shall—

8 (1) reliquidate each entry which occurred after

9 December 31, 1992 and before the effective date of

10 this Act at the rate of duty that would have been as11 sessed if that entry had been made on December 31,

12 1992; and

13 (2) make the appropriate refund of duty.

14 Such reliquidations and refunds shall be made within one

15 hundred and eighty days after the date on which the re16 quest is made.

Æ
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We herebyconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (FormS-8 Nos. 33-44012, 33-44599, 33-64032, 333-2676, 333-70057 and 333-57130)pertaining to the Stock Option Plan and Non-employee Director Stock Option Planof our report dated March 8, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements and schedules of Fischer Imaging Corporation included in this AnnualReport on Form 10-K as of and for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004.

 
| /s/ Ehrhardt Keefe Steiner & Hottman PC |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                        |
| Denver,  Colorado                           |
| March 31, 2006                              |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 187 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 187

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                          May 27, 1993.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and they are hereby, elected 
to the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Agriculture: Mr. Smith, Michigan; and Mr. Everett, Alabama.
    Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries: Mrs. Bentley, Maryland; Mr. 
Taylor, North Carolina; and Mr. Torkildsen, Massachusetts.
    Committee on Veterans Affairs: Mr. Stearns, Florida; and Mr. King, New York.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
EXHIBIT NO. 32.1

 

WRITTEN STATEMENTPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

The undersigned, Marc T. Giles, the Chief Executive Officer of Gerber Scientific, Inc. (the "Company"), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, hereby certifies that:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended October 31, 2003 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii)	the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  December 11, 2003
Exhibit 32.2CERTIFICATION(Not filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, the undersigned, Steven D. Foster, the Chief Financial Officer of Parallel PetroleumCorporation (“Parallel”), hereby certifies that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Parallel for theyear ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the periodic reporting requirements of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in that Form 10-K Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofParallel.Dated:February 28, 2007         /s/ Steven D. Foster   Steven D. Foster,   Chief Financial Officer        A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toParallel Petroleum Corporation and will be retained by Parallel Petroleum Corporation and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### CONFEDERATION LIFE ASSOCIATION, a Canadian corporation, Petitioner, Cross-Respondent, v. Reyes Arida CONTE, Respondent, Cross-Petitioner.

No. 41888.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 4, 1972.

Order granting cross-petition for writ of certiorari.

See, also, 254 So.2d 45.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ADKINS, J., dissents.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 694

To amend the Public Health Service Act to expand and intensify programs

of the National Institutes of Health with respect to research and related

activities concerning osteoporosis, Paget’s disease, and related bone disorders.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 27, 1993

Ms. SNOWE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Energy and Commerce

A BILL

To amend the Public Health Service Act to expand and

intensify programs of the National Institutes of Health

with respect to research and related activities concerning

osteoporosis, Paget’s disease, and related bone disorders.

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

•HR 694 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Osteoporosis Amend3 ments of 1993’’.

4 SEC. 2. PROGRAM OF RESEARCH ON OSTEOPOROSIS,

5 PAGET’S DISEASE, AND RELATED BONE DIS6 ORDERS.

7 Part B of title IV of the Public Health Service Act

8 (42 U.S.C. 284 et seq.), as amended by section 121(b)

9 of Public Law 102–321 (106 Stat. 358), is amended by

10 adding at the end the following new section:

11 ‘‘RESEARCH ON OSTEOPOROSIS, PAGET’S DISEASE, AND

12 RELATED BONE DISORDERS

13 ‘‘SEC. 409A. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Directors of

14 the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal

15 and Skin Diseases, the National Institute on Aging, and

16 the National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney

17 Diseases, shall expand and intensify the programs of such

18 Institutes with respect to research and related activities

19 concerning osteoporosis, Paget’s disease, and related bone

20 disorders.

21 ‘‘(b) COORDINATION.—The Directors referred to in

22 subsection (a) shall jointly coordinate the programs re23 ferred to in such subsection and consult with the Arthritis

24 and Musculoskeletal Diseases Interagency Coordinating

25 Committee and the Interagency Task Force on Aging

26 Research.
3

•HR 694 IH

1 ‘‘(c) INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE.—

2 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In order to assist in carry3 ing out the purpose described in subsection (a), the

4 Director of NIH shall provide for the establishment

5 of an information clearinghouse on osteoporosis and

6 related bone disorders to facilitate and enhance

7 knowledge and understanding on the part of health

8 professionals, patients, and the public through the

9 effective dissemination of information.

10 ‘‘(2) ESTABLISHMENT THROUGH GRANT OR

11 CONTRACT.—For the purpose of carrying out para12 graph (1), the Director of NIH shall enter into a

13 grant, cooperative agreement, or contract with a

14 nonprofit private entity involved in activities regard15 ing the prevention and control of osteoporosis and

16 related bone disorders.

17 ‘‘(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—For the

18 purpose of carrying out this section, there are authorized

19 to be appropriated $40,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, and

20 such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years

21 1995 and 1996.’’.

Æ