alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: RSM Production Corporation and Jack Grynberg v. Global Petroleum 

Group, Ltd, Tricon Geophysics, Inc., Seabird Exploration Americas, 

Inc., and Blackwater Subsea, LLC

Appellate case number: 01-19-00474-CV

Trial court case number: 2013-74337

Trial court: 189th District Court of Harris County

Appellants, RSM Production Corporation and Jack Grynberg, have filed a Motion to Abate 

the Briefing Deadlines until the district clerk files a supplemental clerk’s record. Appellants state 

in their motion that they requested a supplemental clerk’s record from the district clerk 

contemporaneously with their motion to abate filed in this Court. Appellants’ motion to abate is 

DENIED. 

Appellants’ brief remains due on October 25, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). If 

appellants need additional time to file their brief because of their request for a supplemental clerk’s 

record, they may file a motion to extend time under Rule 38.6(d). See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(d). All 

motions filed in this Court shall comply with Rule 10.1(a)(5), which requires motions to “contain 

or be accompanied by a certificate stating that the filing party conferred, or made a reasonable 

attempt to confer, with all other parties about the merits of the motion and whether those parties 

oppose the motion.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5) (emphasis added).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: ___October 17, 2019____
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-1428

VERNON A. GUION, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 v. 

GORDAN R. ENGLAND, 

 Defendant – Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (4:06-cv-00070-F) 

Submitted: October 14, 2008 Decided: October 16, 2008 

Before KING, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Vernon A. Guion, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., 

Assistant United States Attorney, Kelly Michele Perry, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

 Vernon A. Guion appeals the district court’s order and 

judgment granting summary judgment to the Appellee and 

dismissing his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find 

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. See Guion v. England, No. 4:06-

cv-00070-F (E.D.N.C. Mar. 10, 2008). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before the court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT DECEMBER 25, 1999 AND THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 25, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000948929
<NAME> SCHEIN PHARMACEUTICAL, INC
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-25-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-25-1999
<CASH>                                           3,821
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,028
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,200)
<INVENTORY>                                    128,726
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               224,195
<PP&E>                                         177,052
<DEPRECIATION>                                (76,322)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 403,501
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          241,014
<BONDS>                                         92,738
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           329
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,789
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   403,501
<SALES>                                        477,161
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               477,161
<CGS>                                          306,019
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  213,382
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,268
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,661
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (62,169)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (27,781)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (34,388)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (34,388)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.05)


</TABLE>
#### Spencer J. HIND and Judy R. Hind, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Carmen I. QUILLES aka Carmen Gomez Quilles, and Porfidia Torres, Defendants and Respondents, Bear River Mutual Insurance Company, Intervening Plaintiff and Respondent.

No. 870058.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Nov. 5, 1987.

Frederick N. Green, Salt Lake City, for plaintiffs and appellants.

Thomas A. Duffin, Salt Lake City, for defendants and respondents.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs appeal from summary judgment granted to their insurer, Bear River Mutual Insurance Company (“Bear River”), intervening plaintiff. \

Plaintiffs were injured while riding on their motorcycle, when they collided with an automobile driven by defendant Quilles. Quilles was uninsured. Plaintiffs had not insured the motorcycle they were riding, but had an insurance policy issued by Bear River that covered two automobiles owned by plaintiffs. The policy contained uninsured motorist coverage, as described under Utah Code Ann. § 41-12-21.1 (1981). Plaintiffs contend that they are entitled to benefits under the uninsured motorist coverage of that policy for damages incurred in the collision with Quilles.

The policy issued by Bear River specifically excludes such coverage for any vehicle owned by plaintiffs not included in the policy and for which no premium was paid. In our recent case of *Clark v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.,*743 P.2d 1227 (1987), we held that neither the statute nor public policy forbids restrictions of uninsured motorist coverage such as the one contained in this policy. That case is controlling on plaintiffs’ first issue on appeal. Inasmuch as all other issues depend on a finding of coverage under the policy, we do not address them. The judgment is affirmed. Costs to Bear River.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Genio Group, Inc. (the
"Company") for the nine months ended June 30th, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Andrew
Schenker, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, 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.








Date: Aug
19th
2009, 2009 /s/
      Andrew Schenker


Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**Certification Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofDynCorp International LLC (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 29,2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), the undersigned, Herbert J. Lanese, Chief Executive Officer,hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(i) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: November 13, 2006 |   | /s/ HERBERT J.  LANESE                                    |
|------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                         |   | Herbert J. Lanese                                         |
|                         |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                         |   | (principal executive officer)                             |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         24,051,132
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               24,051,132
<PP&E>                                         37,775,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 61,826,132
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,394,443
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     57,431,689
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   61,826,132
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                                                                                

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



The Board of Directors and Stockholders
World Airways, Inc.:



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(No.333-13575, No. 333-14461 and No. 333-14457) on Form S-8 and registration
statements (No. 333-14455, No. 333-39673 and No. 333-42681) on Form S-3 of World
Airways, Inc. of our report dated March 30, 1999, relating to the balance
sheets of World Airways, Inc. as of December 31, 1998 and 1997, and the related
statements of operations, changes in stockholders' deficiency and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1998, and the
related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the December 31,
1998 annual report on Form 10-K of World Airways, Inc.



                                                            KPMG LLP



Washington, D.C.
March 31, 1999
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1994 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1994

    To suspend temporarily the duty on certain reusable fabric bags.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 28, 2009

 Ms. Klobuchar introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To suspend temporarily the duty on certain reusable fabric bags.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN REUSABLE FABRIC BAGS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Reusable fabric     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        bags entered with                                                  31/2011.......
                        at least one
                        article of
                        bedding per bag
                        (provided for in
                        subheading
                        6307.90.98)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 December 20, 2017

d1213

Order 

Clerk

December 20, 2017

155621

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 155621

COA: 333465

Kalamazoo CC: 2015-001584-FH

AARON JOSEPH PELLETIER,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 28, 2016 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 12.1
  Residential
    Capital Corporation
  Exhibit 12.1 
    Computation of the Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
    Three Months


Six MonthsEnded June 30,


Ended June 30,2008


2007


2008


2007(Dollars in thousands)Net loss before adjustment for minority interest

$
(1,887,638
)

$
(229,595
)

$
(2,708,447
)

$
(1,120,982
)Income tax expense


111,339



64,988



83,157



135,629Equity-method investee distribution


34,692



3,365



59,762



30,637Equity-method investee loss (earnings)


16,131



(5,412
)


14,583



(22,638
)Interest expense


977,027



1,656,377



2,147,423



3,401,561Interest portion of rental expense


8,669



12,408



16,976



22,944Earnings available to cover fixed charges

$
(739,780
)

$
1,502,131


$
(386,546
)

$
2,447,151Fixed Charges:Interest expense

$
977,027


$
1,656,377


$
2,147,423


$
3,401,561Interest portion of rental expense


8,669



12,408



16,976



22,944Total fixed charges

$
985,696


$
1,668,785


$
2,164,399


$
3,424,505Ratio of earnings to fixed charges(a)






0.90







0.71     (a)
    
    The ratio calculation indicates a less than one-to-one coverage
    for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007.
    Earnings available for fixed charges for the three and six
    months ended June 30, 2008 is negative, and therefore, no
    ratio to fixed charges is calculated and the earnings available
    for fixed charges is inadequate to cover total fixed charges.
    The deficit amounts for the ratio are $1.7 and
    $2.6 billion, respectively. In addition, earnings available
    for fixed charges for the three and six months ended
    June 30, 2007, were inadequate to cover total fixed
    charges. The deficit amounts for the ratio were $0.2 and
    $1.0 billion, respectively.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                      LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
ENTITY NAME                                   STATE OF INCORPORATION
-----------                                   ----------------------
<S>                                           <C>
HEARST-ARGYLE STATIONS, INC.                        NEVADA
WAPT HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
KITV HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
KHBS HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
KMBC HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
WBAL HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
WCVB HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
WISN HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
WTAE HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
KCRA HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
OHIO/OKLAHOMA HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.        NEVADA
JACKSON HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.              DELAWARE
ARKANSAS HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.             DELAWARE
HEARST-ARGYLE SPORTS, INC.                          DELAWARE
HEARST-ARGYLE PROPERTIES, INC.                      DELAWARE
HEARST-ARGYLE INVESTMENTS, INC.                     DELAWARE
CHANNEL 58, INC.                                    CALIFORNIA
DES MOINES HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.           DELAWARE
ORLANDO HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.              DELAWARE
NEW ORLEANS HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.          DELAWARE
WYFF HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
WXII HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
KOAT HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
WLKY HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
KETV HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
WGAL HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC.                 CALIFORNIA
</TABLE>
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1997 

To extend the temporary suspension of the duty on Propargite. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 28, 2009 

Mr. CHAMBLISS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of the duty on 

Propargite. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROPARGITE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.25.09 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Propargite) is amended by striking the date in the effec7 tive period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1997 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## N AVY



## – M ARINE 

## C ORPS 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

_________________________ No

. 201 600 335

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v. 

### ERIC W. CALVI Intelligence Specialist First Class (E

- 6 ), U.S. Navy Appellant

__________________

_______ Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: C aptain Charles M. Purnell
, JAGC, USN

. For Appellant : Major Lee C. Kindlon
, US MCR

. For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________ Decided 30 December 20 16

_________________________ Before C AMPBELL , H U TCHISON , and G ROHARING , Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved b y the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL Clerk of Court
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1488 

To extend temporarily the 18-month period of continuation coverage under 

group health plans required under COBRA continuation coverage provisions so as to provide for a total period of continuation coverage of 

up to 24 months. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 21, 2009 

Mr. BURRIS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To extend temporarily the 18-month period of continuation 

coverage under group health plans required under 

COBRA continuation coverage provisions so as to provide 

for a total period of continuation coverage of up to 

24 months. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘COBRA Coverage Ex5 tension Act of 2009’’. 


smartinez on DSKD5P82C1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1488 IS

1 SEC. 2. TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF BASIC PERIOD OF 

2 COBRA CONTINUATION COVERAGE FROM 18 

3 MONTHS TO 24 MONTHS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—In any case in which an individual 

5 is eligible for and has elected continuation coverage under 

6 a COBRA continuation coverage provision as of the date 

7 of enactment of this Act and the period of continuation 

8 coverage applicable with respect to such individual under 

9 such provision would (but for this section) end before the 

10 end of the period of 12 calendar months following the date 

11 of enactment of this Act by reason of a limitation under 

12 such provision of such coverage to 18 months after the 

13 date of the qualifying event, such limitation shall be ex14 tended to the earlier of— 

15 (1) the end of such period of 12 calendar 

16 months; or 

17 (2) 24 months after the date of the qualifying 

18 event. 

19 (b) COBRA CONTINUATION COVERAGE PROVI20 SION.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘COBRA 

21 continuation coverage provision’’ means— 

22 (1) part 6 of subtitle B of title I of the Em23 ployee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 

24 U.S.C. 1161 et seq.); 

25 (2) title XXII of the Public Health Service Act 

26 (42 U.S.C. 300bb–1 et seq.); 


smartinez on DSKD5P82C1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1488 IS

1 (3) section 4980B of the Internal Revenue Code 

2 of 1986; or 

3 (4) section 8905a of title 5, United States 

4 Code. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKD5P82C1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 21.1

                         Subsidiaries of TransPro, Inc.

The following sets forth a list of all the direct and indirect subsidiaries as
of December 31, 2001 of Transpro, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"),
and the State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization of each.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         JURISDICTION OF
                        NAME                                      INCORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION
-----------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------
<S>                                                       <C>
G&O Manufacturing Company, Inc.                                              Delaware
GO/DAN Industries, Inc.                                                      Delaware
GO/DAN de Mexico, SA de C.V.                                                  Mexico
Radiadores GDI, SA de C.V.                                                    Mexico
Transpro Indus Ltd.                                                         Mauritius
Ready Aire, Inc.                                                              Texas
</TABLE>