alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Edward s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 29, 2014

No. 04-14-00483-CV

Rowland MARTIN, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

Edward BRAVENEC, and The Law Office of Mcknight and Bravenec,

Appellee

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-07644

Honorable Dick Alcala, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On July 24, 2014, Appellant Rowland Martin filed a sworn Affidavit of Indigency. After 

reviewing appellant’s application, we find it meets the requirements of Rule 20.1 of the Texas 

Rules of Appellate Procedure relating to affidavits of indigence. TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(b). 

Accordingly, we ABATE the cause to the trial court and ORDER that:

a. the clerk, court reporter, or any party wishing to challenge the claim of 

indigence do so by filing a contest to the affidavit in the trial court within 

10 days from the date of this order. TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(e).

b. the trial court conduct a hearing or sign an order extending the time to 

conduct a hearing within 10 days after the contest is filed; providing, 

however, that the time for conducting a hearing on the contest must not be 

extended for more than 20 days from the date the trial court signs its order 

extending the time to conduct the hearing. TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(i)(2).

c. the trial court determine whether or not the appeal is frivolous if no 

contest is filed or if a contest is overruled. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.

CODE § 13.003.

d. the trial court prepare a written order and written findings of fact and 

conclusions of law regarding its indigence determination and its 

determination with regard to whether the appeal is frivolous.
e. the trial court clerk file a supplemental clerk’s record as soon as 

practicable after the trial court enters its order and written findings and 

conclusions but in no event later than 60 days from the date of this court’s 

order, containing: (1) the contest or a certificate stating no contest was 

filed: (2) the trial court’s order; (3) the trial court’s findings of fact and 

conclusions of law; (4) the judgment being appealed; (5) any postjudgment motions; (6) the notice of appeal; and (7) the court’s docket 

sheet.

f. the court reporter file a reporter’s record of the hearing as soon as 

practicable but in no event later than 60 days from the date of this court’s 

order.

We further ORDER the clerk of this court to forward a copy of appellant’s affidavit of 

indigence to all parties. All appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending further orders 

from this court.

_________________________________

Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 29th day of July, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB ("Form 10-QSB") of Smart-tek

Solutions, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended December 31,2006 as filed with

the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Perry Law, 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 Form 10-QSB 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 Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all

material respects, the financial condition and results of operations

of the Company.



/s/ Perry Law

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

Perry Law

Chief Executive Officer

February
13, 2007
H. Res. 82 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 26, 2013. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are 

hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE: Mr. Fincher, to rank immediately after Mr. Denham. 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS: Mr. Harris. 

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET: Mr. Price of Georgia, to 

rank immediately after Mr. Cole; Mrs. Black, to rank immediately after Mr. Lankford; and Mr. Duffy. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS: Mr. Renacci. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-20694 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. MARTIN ALVAREZ GAME Z , also known as Martin Alvarez, also k nown as Martin Ca r los-Gamez, also k nown as M artin Alvarez-Gamez, also k nown as Juan Garcia-Rivera, also known as Martin Carlos Alvarez-Gamez, also known as Carlos Alvarez, also known as Martin Gamez Alvarez, also k nown as Eduardo Gamez Alvarez, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:11-CR-559-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Martin Alvarez Gamez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry of a deported alien after a n aggravated felony conviction. He was sentenced to 78 months of imprisonment and no term of supervised release. Gamez argues that his guilty plea was not knowing a nd volu n t a ry because trial c ounsel failed to recognize, U n i t e d S t a te s C o u rt o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Novem ber 13, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-20694 Document: 00512439361 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/13/2013No. 12-20694

investigate, a nd advise him about a potential defense to his offense of conviction. Specifically, he contends that although c ounsel did investigate and advise him of a possible defense based on derivative c itizenship, counsel did n ot recognize, investigate, and advise him that he may h av e h ad a possible defense to the illegal reentry charge based on acquisition of citizenship at birth. G a m e z did n ot raise this ineffective assistance of c ounsel claim in t h e district court. “[T]he g eneral rule in this circuit i s that a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegations.” United States v . Cantwell , 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2 0 0 6) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Because we conclude that “we cannot fairly e valuate the claim from the record,”

we decline to consider Gamez’s ineffective assistance of counsel c laim on appeal without prej u d i c e t o h is right to raise the c laim in a timely 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding. See United States v. Gulley , 526 F.3d 809, 821-22 (5th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 12-20694 Document: 00512439361 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/13/2013
259 La. 882

#### Loy W. SCARBOROUGH and Hess Curry, Jr. v. John A. DUKE.

No. 51747.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 18, 1971.

In re: John A. Duke applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of LaSalle. 251 So.2d 58.

Application denied; there is no error of law in the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF INTERIM CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Ambassadors International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Laura L. Tuthill, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company certifies, 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), 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                |  | 
|------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ Laura L. Tuthill            |  | 
|Laura L. Tuthill                |  | 
|Interim Chief Financial Officer |  | 
|(Principal Financial Officer)   |  | 
|August 9, 2007                  |  | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, 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.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Shareholder of Nordstrom Credit, Inc.
Centennial, Colorado

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
33-55905 on Form S-3 of our report dated May 13, 2005, which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the
effects of the restatement described in Note 14 to the consolidated financial
statements, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Nordstrom Credit,
Inc. and subsidiary for the year ended January 29, 2005.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Seattle, Washington
May 13, 2005
#### MASON *v.*WARDEN OF MARYLAND PENITENTIARY

[App. No. 55,

September Term, 1961.]

*Decided July 10, 1962.*

Before the full Court.

Per Curiam.

This is an application for leave to appeal under the U.P.C.P.A. The order of the trial court denying relief and dismissing applicant’s petition was filed December 15, 1961, and this application for leave to appeal was not filed until the 1st of February, 1962. Consequently, it must be denied.

*Application denied.*
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Report of Evergreen Solar, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 2, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Paul Kawa, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as 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) 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.



|                               
|-------------------------------
|November 5, 2010               
|                               
|/s/ Paul Kawa                  
|Paul Kawa                      
|Interim Chief Financial Officer

This certification
accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
EXHIBIT 21.1

                                MICROGRAFX, INC.

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

Information is set forth below  concerning all subsidiaries of the Company as of
June 30, 2000:

NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                    INCORPORATION                     COMPANY

InterCAP Graphics Systems             Delaware                             100%
Micrografx France, SARL               France                               100%
Micrografx Deutschland GmBH           Germany                              100%
Micrografx Japan. K.K.                Japan                                100%
Micrografx B.V.                       The Netherlands                      100%
Micrografx Technology N.V.            Netherlands Antilles                 100%
Micrografx, Ltd.                      United Kingdom                       100%
Micrografx Australia Pty. Limited     Australia                            100%
Micrografx Italia S.r.l.              Italy                                100%
Micrografx Interactive, Inc.          Delaware                             100%
Image2Web, Inc.                       Delaware                             100%



<PAGE>
# C_2023063EN.01004001.xml

| 20.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Hotel Cipriani v EUIPO — Altunis (CIPRIANI FOOD)

(Case T-358/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark CIPRIANI FOOD - Genuine use of a mark - Nature of use - Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Extent of use - Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2023/C 63/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hotel Cipriani SpA (Venice, Italy) (represented by: M. Rieger-Jansen, D. Op de Beeck and W. Pors, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Altunis-Trading, Gestão e Serviços, Sociedade unipessoal, Lda (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: M. Pomares Caballero, E. Salis and T. Barber Giner, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 April 2021 (Case R 1599/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Hotel Cipriani SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred, in connection with the present proceedings, by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Altunis-Trading, Gestão e Serviços, Sociedade unipessoal, Lda. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Hotel Cipriani SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred, in connection with the present proceedings, by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Altunis-Trading, Gestão e Serviços, Sociedade unipessoal, Lda.

---

(1)  OJ C 338, 23.8.2021.

---
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Frank Hinshaw, SKYDIVING 

SCHOOL, INC., d/b/a SKYDIVE 

HAWAII AND ISLAND SKYDIVING, 

LLC 

COMPLAINANT 

v. 

THE STATE OF HAWAII 

RESPONDENT. 

Docket No. 16-12-04 

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME 

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the above-referenced 

complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport 

Enforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR Part 16 (Rules of Practice). Pursuant to the Rules of Practice, 

§16.ll(a), the date by which the Director, FAA Office of Airport Compliance and Management 

Analysis will issue a Director's Determination in this matter is hereby extended to on or before 

August 13,2014. 

Randall S. Fiertz 

Director, Office of Airport 

Compliance and Management Analysis 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August _f_· _, 2014 I placed in the United States mail (first class, 

postage paid), a true copy of the Notice of Extension of Time addressed to: 

Frank Hinshaw 

Skydiving School Inc., 

d/b/a Skydive Hawaii 

PO Box 75520 

Honolulu, Hawaii, 96836 

Complainant 

Richard J. Durden 

Attorney at Law 

27987 Richmond Hill Road 

Conifer, CO 80433 

Counsel for Complainant 

Glenn I. Kimura 

Deputy Attorney General 

Department of the Attorney General, State of Hawaii 

465 S. King Street, Room 300 

Honolulu, HI 96813 

Counsel for Respondent 

Copy to: 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

AC0-100 

Claudia Roberts 

Office of Airport Compliance and 

Management Analysis
Exhibit 31.1
 Certification
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AXS-One Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date:  November 13, 2008
    /s/ William P. LyonsWilliam P. LyonsChief Executive Officer and
Chairman of the Board
From: McKaughan, Colleen

Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 5:13:22 PM

To: jgrady@calportland.com

Cc: Nudd, Gregory; Webb, Thomas; Kelly, Shaheerah; ecm@azdeq.gov

Subject: RE: New Court-Ordered Deadline for Regional Haze FIP 

Hi, Jay,

I should have changed the May 1st date to the 10th. Cal Portland has until May 10th to get us any 

information that you think would be helpful. 

Colleen McKaughan

From: McKaughan, Colleen

Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 5:04 PM

To: jgrady@calportland.com

Cc: Nudd, Gregory; Webb, Thomas; Kelly, Shaheerah; ecm@azdeq.gov

Subject: New Court-Ordered Deadline for Regional Haze FIP 

Dear Jay,

I’m writing to let you know that the court-ordered deadline for EPA to propose a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) addressing regional haze in Arizona has been extended to September 

6, 2013. Our deadline for final action on Arizona’s State Implementation Plan (SIP) remains July 

15, 2013. The deadline for commenting on our December 20, 2012 proposed action on 

Arizona’s SIP is March 6, 2013. 

If EPA finalizes disapproval of any aspect of the Arizona Regional Haze SIP, we are obligated to 

propose and later finalize a FIP to address these disapproved portions. The deadlines for these 

proposed and final actions are set in a consent decree. The parties to the consent decree 

recently agreed to extend these deadlines and the United States District Court for the District of 

Columbia issued an order granting a motion to amend the consent decree to reflect these new 

deadlines. The new deadlines of September 6, 2013 for the proposed action and February 6, 

2014 for the final action provide the agency more time for the technical work that will form the 

basis of the FIP. 

If you are planning to provide technical information that you think would be helpful to EPA in 

preparing our FIP proposal, please provide that information no later than May 1, 2013. This will 

allow us enough time to review and consider the information in preparing the proposal.

In the case of Kilns 1-4 at the CalPortland Cement Company in Rillito, Arizona, we are 

particularly interested in getting your feedback regarding the effectiveness of potential controls 

and the control costs estimated by our contractor, as well as information about whether the 

kilns employ existing inherent or add-on controls for minimizing nitrogen oxide emissions. 

If you have any questions, please let me know. We look forward to hearing from you soon.

Colleen McKaughan
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 71 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 71

 Opposing the International Olympic Committee's decision to eliminate 
       wrestling from the Summer Olympic Games beginning in 2020.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 2013

 Mr. Loebsack (for himself, Mr. Jordan, Mr. Walz, Mr. Braley of Iowa, 
 Mr. King of Iowa, and Mr. Latham) submitted the following resolution; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Opposing the International Olympic Committee's decision to eliminate 
       wrestling from the Summer Olympic Games beginning in 2020.

Whereas wrestling is recognized as one of the world's oldest competitive sports 
        dating back to 3000 BC;
Whereas wrestling was one of the original sports of the ancient Greek Olympic 
        Games and of the first modern Olympic Games;
Whereas wrestling is one of the world's most diverse sports, with participants 
        from almost 200 countries around the world;
Whereas over 280,000 high school students in the United States participated in 
        wrestling in 2012;
Whereas there are over 300 intercollegiate wrestling programs in the United 
        States;
Whereas wrestling represents the determination and hard work it takes to succeed 
        in life and sport;
Whereas the United States has a long, proud, and storied Olympic wrestling 
        history; and
Whereas wrestling epitomizes the spirit of the Olympic Games: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) opposes the decision of the International Olympic 
        Committee to eliminate wrestling from the Summer Olympic Games 
        beginning in 2020;
            (2) thanks the United States Olympic Committee for their 
        continued support of wrestling and encourages them to work 
        actively to reverse this decision; and
            (3) urges the International Olympic Committee to reinstate 
        wrestling as a core sport of the Summer Olympic Games.
                                 <all>
```