alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

March 03, 2006

Mr. Fred Fuchs

Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, Inc.

2201 Post Road, Suite 104

Austin, TX 78704

Ms. Theresa Marshall

Mr. R. David Fritsche

Law Offices of R. David Fritsche

921 Proton Road

San Antonio, TX 78258-4203

Mr. Larry Niemann

Niemann and Niemann

1122 Colorado St., Suite 313

Austin, TX 78701

RE:Case Number:  04-0147

Court of Appeals Number:  04-02-00821-CV

Trial Court Number:  277,109

Style:THERESA MARSHALL

v.

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas delivered the enclosed opinion and judgment in the above-referenced cause.  (Justice Green not sitting)

Sincerely,

Andrew Weber, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosures

**Case No. 04-0147Page 1**
EXHIBIT 32.3
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 I, David G. Zahka, Chief Financial Officer of Talk America Holdings, Inc., have reviewed Talk America Holdings, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2003 and, based on the inquiries I have made or caused to be made in the fulfillment of my responsibilities as the Chief Financial Officer of Talk America Holdings, Inc., I hereby certify that:
 
 (i) the Talk America Holdings, Inc. Annual Report on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (ii) the information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Talk America Holdings, Inc.
 
 This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief Financial Officer of Talk America Holdings, Inc. with the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be used for any other purposes. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Talk America Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Talk America Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 /s/ David G. Zahka
 David G. Zahka
 Chief Financial Officer
 March 12, 2004
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 9, 2022

No. 04-21-00387-CV

Donald W. TAYLOR,

Appellant

v.

Clark ASPY, Madison Preston and Naman Howell Smith & Lee, PLL,

Appellees

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 16670

Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

After this court struck appellant’s original brief because it did not comply with Texas 

Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1 and after being granted several extensions, appellant filed his 

pro se brief on July 25, 2022. Appellees filed their brief on August 18, 2022. Any reply brief 

appellant wished to file was due on September 7, 2022

On September 2, 2022, appellant filed a motion requesting a forty-five-day extension of 

time to (1) file a reply brief, (2) file an amended appellant’s brief, and (3) amend and/or increase

his word count. The motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

Appellant is ORDERED to file his reply brief no later than September 27, 2022. 

Appellant’s request to file an amended appellant’s brief and amend and/or increase the wordcount is DENIED.

_________________________________

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

court on this 9th day of September, 2022.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
# L_2007065EN.01001202.xml

| 3.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 65/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 65/12

---

Corrigendum to Decision No 1672/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006 establishing a Community Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity — Progress

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 315 of 15 November 2006
  )

On page 7, in Article 17(1):

for:

‘1.   The financial envelope for implementing the Community activities referred to in this Decision for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 is hereby set at EUR 657 590 000 (*1).

read:

‘1.   The financial envelope for implementing the Community activities referred to in this Decision for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 is hereby set at EUR 743 250 000.’

---

(*1)  This amount is based on 2004 figures and shall be subject to technical adjustment to take account of inflation.’,

*1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; NIAAA Member Conflict application reviews—Biosciences.                    

*Date:*                         March 26, 2012.                    

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 3 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         NIAAA/NIH, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852,  (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Ranga Srinivas, Ph.D., Chief, Extramural Project Review Branch EPRB, NIAAA, National Institutes of Health, 5365 Fishers Lane, Room 2085, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 451-2067,                         *srinivar@mail.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Support Awards, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

                        Dated: March 1, 2012                        *.*

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2012-5680 Filed 3-7-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### EXHIBIT 13

|OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS
        JOSEPH B. LEONARD
        Chairman of the Board
        Chief Executive Officer
        ROBERT L. FORNARO
        President and Chief Operating Officer
        STANLEY J. GADEK
        Senior Vice President, Finance,
        Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer 
        RICHARD B. MAGURNO
        Senior Vice President, General
        Counsel and Secretary
        STEPHEN J. KOLSKI
        Senior Vice President - Operations
        THOMAS KALIL
        Senior Vice President - Customer Service
        J. VERONICA BIGGINS
        Director
        DON L. CHAPMAN
        Director 
        LEWIS H. JORDAN
        Director
        ROBERT L. PRIDDY
        Director
        ROBERT D. SWENSON
        Director
        WILLIAM J. USERY
        Director | CORPORATE INFORMATION
        Corporate Office
        9955 AirTran Boulevard
        Orlando, Florida  33827
        407-251-5600
        Registrar
        American Stock Transfer & Trust Co.
        6201 15th Avenue
        Brooklyn, NY  11219
        Independent Auditors
        Ernst & Young LLP
        600 Peachtree St. N.E.,
        Suite 2800
        Atlanta, GA  30308
        Annual Shareholders' Meeting
        The annual meeting of shareholders
        will be on May 15, 2002 at 11:00 a.m. local 
        time at the Georgia International
        Convention Center.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

####
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 47 (Friday, March 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 14360]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5765]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-1189-000]


DeWind Novus, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based 
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
DeWind Novus, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with 
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, 
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone 
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is March 22, 2012.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with 
any FERC Online service, please email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f6b0b3a4b5b9989a9f9893a5838686998482b690938495d8919980"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="175152455458797b7e797244626767786563577172657439707861">[email protected]</span></a>. or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: March 2, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-5765 Filed 3-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 31.1:





CERTIFICATION





I, Michael A. Bless, certify that:





1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Century Aluminum Company;





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.








Date:  April 30, 2012

/s/ Michael A. BlessName:
Michael A. BlessTitle:
President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

 No. 06-7157 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

KENNETH LEE BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr. District

Judge. (7:04-cr-27; 7:06-cv-01241-HMH)

Submitted: February 22, 2007 Decided: February 28, 2007

Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Lee Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brown has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Brown’s motion to

dismiss the indictment, deny a certificate of appealability, and

dismiss the appeal. We deny Brown’s motion for 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.

DISMISSED
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 13318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5342]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 14185-000, 14196-000]

 Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund IV, FFP Project 55, LLC; Notice 
Announcing Filing Priority for Preliminary Permit Applications

    On February 28, 2012, the Commission held a drawing to determine 
priority between two competing preliminary permit applications with 
identical filing times. In the event that the Commission concludes that 
neither of the applicants' plans is better adapted than the other to 
develop, conserve, and utilize in the public interest the water 
resources of the region at issue, the priority established by this 
drawing will serve as the tiebreaker. Based on the drawing, the order 
of priority is as follows:
    1. Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund IV: Project No. 14185-000.
    2. FFP Project 55, LLC: Project No. 14196-000.

    Dated: February 29, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-5342 Filed 3-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
# EUR-Lex - 32006D0997 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32006D0997

**2006/997/EC: Council Decision of 23 October 2006 on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and Uruguay **

*
Official Journal L 406 , 23/10/2006 P. 0010 - 0010 Official Journal L 406 , 30/12/2006 P. 0010 - 0010 *

Council Decision

of 23 October 2006

on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and Uruguay

(2006/997/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 in conjunction with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas:

(1) On 22 March 2004 the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with certain other Members of the WTO under Article XXIV.6 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, in the course of the accessions to the European Union of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic.

(2) Negotiations have been conducted by the Commission in consultation with the Committee established by Article 133 of the Treaty and within the framework of the negotiating directives issued by the Council.

(3) The Commission has finalised negotiations for an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and Uruguay. The Agreement should be approved,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and Uruguay relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic in the course of the accession to the European Community is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.

The text of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters is attached to this Decision.

Article 2

The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters in order to bind the Community.

Done at Luxembourg, 23 October 2006.

For the Council

The President

J.-E Enestam

--------------------------------------------------
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT ARTHUR MCDORN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. JENNINGS MCABEE; HERBERT B. No. 95-8526 LONG; JULIUS H. BAGGETT; FRANK HARRISON; MCABEE BUILDING SUPPLY, INCORPORATED, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-95-3555-19-BD) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 6, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Arthur McDorn Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

_________________________________________________________________Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: Arthur Williams appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment to Defendants on his 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 (1988) civil complaint. The district court awarded summary judgment upon the recommendation of the magistrate judge. Although we v acate the district court's order and remand for further proceedings, we express no opinion regarding the merits of this action. The district court denied Williams's request for an extension to file objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, butWilliams managed to file timely objections nevertheless. Unfortunately, the district court did not consider Williams's objections because the court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendationbefore the time for filing objections had expired and there is no mention of Williams's timely objections in the district court's opinion. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) (1988), the district court is obligated to review de novo those portions of the magistrate judge's report to which objections are filed. 1 The district court's order, however, does not state that it conducted a review of the record as to those objections or made a decision on the disputed issues de novo. Because Williams made timely objections to the magistrate judge's factual findings, the district court's error was not harmless. 2 Accordingly, we vacate the district court's order and remand the matter for the district court to conduct the required de novo reviewand issue a decision, or state that it conducted such review before rendering its previous decision. We dispense with oral argument because

_________________________________________________________________ 1 See United States v. Schronce , 727 F.2d 91, 93 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). 2 Orpiano v. Johnson , 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982).
2the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. VACATED AND REMANDED 3