alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 24.7****POWER OF ATTORNEY**     KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, that I, the undersigned, do hereby appoint Lionel Reilly or NealSoderquist, or either of them, attorney for me and in my name and on my behalf to sign the AnnualReport on Form 10-K of PROFESSIONAL VETERINARY PRODUCTS, LTD. for the fiscal year ended July 31,2005, and any such amendment thereto, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission(“SEC”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, to file any such amendment to theForm 10-K, exhibits thereto and documents required in connection therewith with the SEC, andgenerally to do and perform all things necessary to be done in the premises as fully andeffectually in all respects as I could do if personally present.     INWITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 21st day of October, 2005.             /s/ Tom Latta               Tom Latta       STATEOF TEXAS  )      )  ss.COUNTYOF HANSFORD  )        Onthis 31st day of October, 2005, before me, a Notary Public qualified for said County,personally came Tom Latta, known to me to be the identical person who signed the foregoinginstrument and acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed.     /s/ Cynthia Copp             Notary Public  My commission expires:         7-30-08
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N NO. 03-14-00583- CV In re Eric Dr ake ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM TRAVIS CO UNTY M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N The petition for wr i t o f m andamus and the emer g ency motion to stay are denied. See Tex. R. App. P . 52.8(a) .

__________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Just ice Be fore J ustice Pury ear , Pemberton and F ield Filed: September

17, 2014
**Exhibit
      32.1**





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT








I,
      Nicholas Gerber, Chief Executive Officer of Victoria Bay Asset Management,
      LLC,
      the general partner of United States Oil Fund, LP (the "Registrant"), certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





1.
      The
      quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant for the fiscal quarter ended
      September 30, 2007 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
      on
      the date hereof (the "Report") fully complies with the
      requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d)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
      Registrant.











Date: 
      November 13, 2007














/s/
      Nicholas D. Gerber


Nicholas
      D. Gerber


Chief
      Executive Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10550

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SAMUEL CORTES-BELTRAN

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:08-CR-1-ALL

Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Samuel Cortes-Beltran

presents arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. GomezHerrera, 523 F.3d 554, 557-64 (5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (July 2, 2008) (No.

08-5226), which held that any disparity in sentencing between fast-track and

non-fast-track jurisdictions is a function of Congressional policy and is not

“unwarranted” under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6), and by United States v. Rodriguez,

523 F.3d 519, 526-27 (5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (June 30, 2008) (No. 08-

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 8, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-10550

2

5101) which held that the lack of a fast-track program does not result in a

violation of equal protection rights. See also United States v. Lopez-Velasquez,

526 F.3d 804, 808 (5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (July 25, 2008) (No. 08-5514).

Cortes-Beltran also raises arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United

States v. Brown, 920 F.2d 1212, 1216-17 (5th Cir. 1991), abrogated on other

grounds by United States v. Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2006), which

held that a district court may order a term of imprisonment to run consecutively

with an unimposed state sentence. The appellant’s motion for summary

disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Order entered March 10, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 20
- 00937
- CV
RETAIL SERVICES WIS CORPORATION D/B/A PRODUCT CONNECTIONS, NATHAN STOUT, AMANDA VILLA, AND KATHERINE PALMER , Appellant s

V. CROSSMARK, INC. , Appellee On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 429
- 05122
- 2020

O RDER Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle Before the Court is appellants’ No vember 20, 2020 renewed motion for emergency temporary relief in which appellants request a stay of the injunction’s mandatory device turnover provision as well as any further inspection of appellants’ electronic devices also produced pursuant to the provi sion

. On December 1, 2020, the Court granted the stay subject to consideration of appellee’s response, if any, to the motion. Having considered appellee’s response, along withall briefing by the parties on the issue presented by the motion, we CONTINUE

THE STAY pending final disposition of the appeal.

/s/ DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.13 MB)

Tags:Loglines

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1461 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1461

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat trees and vines 
producing fruit, nuts, or other crops as placed in service in the year 
     in which it is planted for purposes of special allowance for 
                             depreciation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 16, 2009

    Mrs. Boxer (for herself, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Wyden, Mrs. 
 Feinstein, and Mrs. Gillibrand) introduced the following bill; which 
        was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat trees and vines 
producing fruit, nuts, or other crops as placed in service in the year 
     in which it is planted for purposes of special allowance for 
                             depreciation.

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

SECTION 1. PLACED IN SERVICE DATE FOR TREES AND VINES FOR PURPOSES OF 
              SPECIAL ALLOWANCE FOR DEPRECIATION.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (k) of section 168 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(5) Special rule for certain trees and vines.--For 
        purposes of this subsection, in the case of any qualified 
        property which is a tree or vine producing fruit, nuts, or 
        other crops, such property shall be treated as placed in 
        service in the year in which it is planted.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008.
                                 <all>
```
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED APRIL 28, 2022

NO. 03

- 21

- 00592

- CV

Crestway Drive Land, LLC , Appellant

v.

Rice Capital, LLC Series 21 , Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUS TICES GOODWIN, BAKER, AND TRIANA

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’ S MOTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on March 31, 2021

. Crestway

Drive Land, LLC has filed a n agreed joint motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered

the motion , the Court agrees that the motion should be granted . Therefore, the Court grants the

motion and dis miss es the appeal

. Each party shall bear their own costs relating to this appeal,

both in this Court and in the court below.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MONICA CONSUELO CONSTANTINO

HUIRACHE, a.k.a. Consuelo Constantino

Huirache,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-72421

Agency No. A077-305-114

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 14, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Monica Consuelo Constantino Huirache, a native and citizen of Mexico,

petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying her

FILED

JAN 06 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-72421

motion to reconsider. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the

petition for review and remand for further proceedings.

The agency concluded that Constantino Huirache was ineligible for

cancellation of removal because her conviction under Cal. Penal Code § 273a(b)

was categorically a “crime of child abuse” within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1227(a)(2)(E)(i). We subsequently held that a conviction under section 273a(b)

is not categorically a crime of child abuse. See Fregozo v. Holder, 576 F.3d 1030,

1034 (9th Cir. 2009). We therefore remand for application of the modified

categorical analysis in light of the definition of “child abuse” set forth in Matter of

Velazquez-Herrera, 24 I. & N. Dec. 503 (BIA 2008). See id. at 1040.

In light of our disposition, we do not reach Constantino Huirache’s

remaining contentions. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
Via Metropolitan s



# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

September 11, 2013

N o. 04

- 13

- 00549

- CV

Erne st MUNGUIA

, Appellant

v.

VIA METROPOLITAN TRANSIT

,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 380931 Honorable Irene Rios, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The clerk’s record was due August 21, 2013, but it was not filed. O n September 3, 2013, this court notified the trial court clerk that the clerk’s record was late. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(a)(1). The clerk responded to our notice by stating the clerk’s record was not filed because appellant has not paid or made arrangemen ts to pay the clerk’s fee to prepare the record and appellant is not entitled to the record without paying the fee.

We order appellant Ernest Munguia to provide written proof to this court on or before September 23, 2013 that either (1) the clerk’s fee has been paid or arrangements satisfactory to the clerk have been made to pay the clerk’s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to the clerk’s record without prepayment of the clerk’s fee. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1 and 35.3(a). If appellant fails to file such proof within the time provided, this appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(b).

______________________________ ___ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 11th day of September, 2013

.

_________________________ __________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
JUDGMENT
N o. 04

- 13

- 00338

- CR No. 04

- 13

- 00339

- CR Elias Esequiel VASQUEZ , Appellant

v. The The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 11

- CRS

- 270 & 11

- CRS

- 272 Honorable Ana Lisa Garza, Judge Presiding
BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI , JUSTICE MARION , AND JUSTICE BARNARD In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgments are AFFIRMED.
SIGNED December 10, 2014.

_____________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Exhibit 32.2

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 NewPage Holding Corporation and NewPage Corporation (the Companies) on Form 10-Q
for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David J. Prystash, Chief Financial Officer of the Companies, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §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 position and results of operations of the Companies.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ David J. Prystash  
|David J. Prystash      
|Chief Financial Officer
|August 5, 2010
Exhibit 31.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Robert I. Jordan, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Southern Sauce
Company, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2006;

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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer 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)) for the small business issuer and
have:

   (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
   disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
   ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
   consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
   entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
   prepared;

   (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
   controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
   the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
   the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

   (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
   internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
   business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
   fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
   affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
   issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and;

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

   (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
   operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
   likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
   summarize and report financial information; and

   (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
   employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls
   over financial reporting.

Date: May 15, 2006

/s/ Robert I. Jordan
    President
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

SHAWN SADIK,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 29 WAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 13th day of June, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 18, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-10570 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus HERMAN GEORGE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:02-CR-48-ALL

-------------------- Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Herman George appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for possession of firearms by an armed career criminal.
See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(e). George argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying the Assistant Federal Public Defender Chris A. Cooklin’s first motion to withdraw as appointed counsel. A valid guilty plea waives any nonjurisdictional defects leading to a conviction United StatesNo. 03-10570 -2-
v. Owens , 996 F.2d 59, 60 (5th Cir. 1993). The issue of the district court’s denial of appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw involves a purported nonjurisdictional defect waived by George’s valid guilty plea. See id. George also argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. A district court may grant a motion to withdraw a guilty plea before a defendant is sentenced upon a showing by the defendant of “a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.” F ED . R. C RIM . P. 11(d)(2)(B)(2003); United States v. Brewster , 137 F.3d 853, 857 (5th Cir. 1998) (citing former F ED . R. C RIM . P. 32(e)); see also United States v. Carr , 740 F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984). The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying George’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. See Brewster , 137 F.3d at 857-58.
AFFIRMED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0166

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JONATHAN LOUIS KESSLER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 9, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 2 2024

08/02/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0166
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 1, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

134798 Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Plaintiff-Appellee, Stephen J. Markman, v SC: 134798 Justices COA: 272560 Wayne CC: 04-430645-ND INITIAL TRANSPORT, INC., and EMPLOYERS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants-Appellants, and

GREAT WEST CASUAL TY COMPANY and KIRK NATIONAL LEASING COMPANY, a/k/a KIRK NATIONALEASE COMPANY,

Defendants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to appeal the Ju ly 26, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral argument on whether to grant the application or take ot her peremptory action. MCR 7.302(G)(1). At oral argumen t, the parties shall address (1) whether the Motor Carrier Safety Act (MCS A), MCL 480.11 et seq

., provides a private cause of action or remedy for third parties; (2) whether the MCSA, at MCL 480.11a, im plicitly amended the cap on recoverable property da mages found in the Michigan No-Fault Act, MCL 500.3101 et

seq ., at MCL 500.3121; (3) whether, if the cap has been amended by the MCSA, this has any relevance to this case, where the applicab le financial responsibility amount found in the MCSA is apparently the same as the property damage cap established in the no-fault act; and (4) whether the plaintiff is entitled to any penalty intere st pursuant to MCL 500.2006. The parties may file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order, but they should avoi d submitting a mere restatement of the arguments made in their application papers.

C AVANAGH , J., would deny the appli cation for leave to appeal.

t0129 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 1, 2008

Clerk