alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed as Moot and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10, 2015

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 14

- 00600

- CV

IN RE LARRY TAYLOR, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPA CITY AS STATE SENATOR FOR DISTRICT 11 , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCE EDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 212th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 14CV0395



### MEMORANDUM OPINION
On July 24, 2014, relator Larry Taylor, in his official capacity as State Senator for District 11, filed a petition for writ of mandamu s in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In his petition, relator asks this court to compel the presiding j udge of the 212th District Court of Galveston County to vacate an order that denied relator’s mot ion to quash2 a deposition subpoena and subpoena duces tecum or for a protective order, and that granted a motion to compel the deposition of relator.
On November 3, 2014, we abated this original proceeding in order to enable the parties in the underlying l itigation to finalize a settlement that would obviate the need for the challenged discovery. In our abatement order, we directed relator to periodically advise this court of the status of the settlement discussions in the underlying litigation. In fulfillm ent of that requirement, relator filed a letter with this court on February 3, 2015, stating that “the discovery issues and rulings giving rise to this mandamus proceeding are now moot.” Relator further enclosed with his letter a copy of an agreement betwe en the parties to this original proceeding that resolves the discovery dispute at issue in this proceeding

. Based on relator’s representation to this court and the corresponding agreement he has provided, relator’s request for mandamus relief has been
rend ered moot. Accordingly, we dismiss as moot relator’s petition for writ of
mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Donovan and Brown

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       7,828,223
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  616,189
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,444,412
<PP&E>                                      24,735,828
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,554,790
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,625,450
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          429,914
<BONDS>                                      2,567,936
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,627,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,625,450
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,283,161
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,372,954
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             159,719
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                750,488
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            750,488
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   750,488
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07

- 21

- 00282

- CR

EX PARTE JERMAIN GAITHER

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS



### November 30 , 2021
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN , C.J. , and PIRTLE and PARKER , JJ. Appearing pro se , Jermain Gaither , filed a “ Motion to Reformation of the Judgment , ” wherein he requests this Court “ delete the affirmative deadly weapon finding ”

in his judgment of conviction

. 1 We have construed the document as an application for

writ of habeas corpus in a criminal case challenging his final felony conviction

. A s an intermediate appellate court , t his Court has no original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal law matters. See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221(d) (limiting original habeas jurisdiction of intermediate appellate courts to civil matters) ; Ex parte

1 We previously affirmed Gaither ’ s conviction for aggravated robbery in Gaither v. State , No. 07

- 15

- 00204

- CR , 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 12402 (Tex. App.

— Amarillo Dec. 7 , 2015 , pet. ref ’ d) (mem. op. , not designated for publication).2

Hawkins , 885 S.W.2d 586 , 588 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 1994 , orig. proceeding) (per curiam).

That jurisdiction instead rests with the Court of Crimina l Appeals , the district courts , and

the county courts. T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. a rt

. 11.05 ; Ex parte Hawkins , 885 S.W.2d

at 588. Only the Court of Criminal Appeals has authority to grant post

- conviction habeas

relief in final felony cases. See T EX

. C OD E C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 11.07 ; Ex parte

Alexander

, 685 S.W.2d 57 , 60 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985). For these reasons , we dismiss
Gaither ’ s application for writ of habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction.

Per Curiam Do not publish.
Exhibit
      32(a)








**CERTIFICATION
      FURNISHED 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Progress Energy, Inc. (the
      “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert B. McGehee,
      Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:




(1)  the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), 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 result of operations of the Company.











/s/
      Robert B. McGehee


Robert
      B.
      McGehee


Chairman
      and Chief Executive Officer


February
      26, 2007








This
      certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed filed by the Company
      for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
      or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Exchange Act
      of
      1934, as amended, or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 (as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002), I, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of infoUSA Inc. (the
Company), hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

|      |  |                 |  |                                                    
|----- |  | --------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Date: |  | August 13, 2002 |  | /s/ Vinod GuptaVinod Gupta,
Chief Executive Officer

26
**Exhibit
      99.3**





**KPMG
                  LLP**
              Telephone
              (514)
                  840-2100**Chartered
                  Accountants**
              Fax
              (514)
                  840-2187600
                  de
                  Maisonneuve Blvd. West
              Internet
              www.kpmg.caSuite
                  1500Montréal,
                  Québec H3A 0A3
  
 **Consent
        of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
 
 The
        Board
        of Directors of
 Canadian
        National Railway Company
 
 We
        consent
        to the use of our Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
        dated
        February 11, 2008 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Canadian
        National Railway Company as at December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 and
        the
        consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, changes in
        shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
        period ended December 31, 2007, and our Report of Independent Registered
        Public
        Accounting Firm dated February 11, 2008 on the effectiveness of internal
        control
        over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, which is included in this
        annual report on Form 40-F of Canadian National Railway Company for the year
        ended December 31, 2007, and incorporated by reference, in the registration
        statement (No. 333-147725) on Form F-9 through the 6-K filing on February
        12,
        2008.
 
 /s/
        KPMG
        LLP
 Chartered
        Accountants
 
 Montréal,
        Canada
 February
        11, 2008
 
 
  KPMG
        LLP,
        a Canadian limited liability partnership is the Canadian
 member
        firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 22

- 00251

- CV

KYLE TRAMMELL v. KYLIE TRAMMELL
On Appeal from the County Court at Law of Aransas County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. A

- 21

- 7045

- FL

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this caus e on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant.
We further order this decision certified below for observance. June 30, 2022
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Consumer and Marketing Service 

Fruit and Vegetable Division 

Processed Products Standardization and 

Inspection Branch April 5, 1965 

FOR USE OF USDA 

PROCESSED FOOD INSPECTORS 

Supersedes memo A-296 dated 

November 19, 1959 

TO: All Processed Food Inspectors 

FROM: Fred Dunn, Chief of the Branch 

SUBJECT: Color Interpretation for Frozen Breaded Onion Rings 

FILE UNDER: United States Standards for Grades of Frozen Breaded Onion Rings 

The USDA Color Standards for Frozen French Fried Potatoes -- Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 -- may be 

used as guides when interpreting the color requirements specified in the grade standards for 

onion rings in the following manner: 

BEFORE HEATING AFTER HEATING 

A Classification Bright and typical color 

of properly prepared 

frozen onion rings for 

each type. 

The product is predominantly of a single 

color approximating No. 3 or No. 4 or No.5 

or a color in between but not darker than No. 

5. 

B Classification Variable but typical 

color, may be dull but 

not off color, for each 

type. 

The product may be variable and dull but not 

off color. Not more than a total of 15 

percent, by count, of the units may fall 

outside the color range of No. 3 to No.5 

inclusive. No charred units. 

Agriculture-Washington 

DISTRIBUTION: A
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1566 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1566

 To amend the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 to ensure online 
  access to the registration statements filed under such Act, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2019

 Ms. Jayapal introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 to ensure online 
  access to the registration statements filed under such Act, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. ENSURING ONLINE ACCESS TO REGISTRATION STATEMENTS.

    (a) Requiring Statements Filed by Registrants To Be in Digitized 
Format.--Section 2(g) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, 
as amended (22 U.S.C. 612(g)) is amended by striking ``in electronic 
form'' and inserting ``in a digitized format which will enable the 
Attorney General to meet the requirements of section 6(d)(1) (relating 
to public access to an electronic database of statements and 
updates)''.
    (b) Requirements for Electronic Database of Registration Statements 
and Updates.--Section 6(d)(1) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 616(d)(1)) is 
amended--
            (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
        ``to the extent technically practicable,''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``includes the 
        information'' and inserting ``includes in a digitized format 
        the information''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to statements filed on or after the expiration of 
the 180-day period which begins on the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
1 

### Whalen, Marilyn

From: Poentis, Aaron Y CIV NAVFAC HI, EV <aaron.poentis@navy.mil>

Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 1:40 PM

To: roxanne.kwan@doh.hawaii.gov; Richard Ta kaba (richard.takaba@doh.hawaii.gov)

Cc: stuart.yamada@doh.hawaii.gov; steven.chang@doh.hawaii.gov;

joanna.seto@doh.hawaii.gov; Linder, Steven; Pa llarino, Bob; Lovgren, Andrew C LT

NAVSUP, 700; Shimabuku, June T. CIV NAVFAC HI, EV4; Kishaba, Raelynn I CIV NAVFAC

HI, EV4; Tsutsui, Bruce O CIV NAVFAC HI, OPHE3; Nakamura, Peter M CIV NAVFAC HI,

EV1; Mizuno, Arleen M CI V NAVFAC HI, PRJ412

Subject: RED HILL STATUS REPORT - September 2, 2014

Importance: High

Hi Richard/Roxanne:

Attached are the updated information for the weekly progress report from Navy Region Hawaii, and the Fleet Logistic

Center Pearl Harbor for the week of September 9, 2014. In a process to ease reading, only sections with changes will be

annotated.

1. Preliminary Work Plan

Action complete.

2. Release Response Action Items (initiate immediately, complete as soon as practicable)

a. Action 1

‐ Provide a schedule for the ventilation of Tank 5 and an estimated date to commence the investigation

of release point(s) within Tank 5.

Action complete.

b. Action 2

‐ The rate of vertical migration for the released JP

‐ 8 free product is unknown. Information from the

previously collected basalt cores could be used for initial modeling of vertical migration. This information is necessary to

protect drinking water resources from petroleum contamination. Prepare models for petroleum JP

‐ 8 releases of 10,000,

20,000 and 30,000 gallons from points at 25% intervals from the bottom to the top of Tank 5.

No change.

c. Action 3

‐ Removal of petroleum free product from the area outside the tank will reduce downward migration of

the released JP

‐ 8 free product. Characterization of the free product plume and recovery of free product with increased

monitoring are required to address this plume.

No change.

d. Action 4

‐ Additional studies and procedures are required to address the potential and impact of any future

releases from the USTs within the Complex. This will require new financial and personnel resources to complete.

Funding for the preliminary work plan and all necessary following work is critical.

d.(1) Sentinel Wells

Navy contractors continued drilling operations to install two new groundwater monitoring wells north of the Red Hill

Bulk Fuel Storage Facility.

d.(2) Site Characterization2 The Navy is awaiting DOH/EPA written comments on the Draft Work Plan/ Sampling and Analysis Plan for Tank 5 Area

Characterization of July 2014.

d.(3) AOC/SOW

No change.

d.(4) Request for Additional Information

The Navy continued to provide to the DOH and EPA via email the specific Red Hill information requested in DOH email of

August 1, 2014.

d.(5) Weekly Telephone Conference Calls

The next telephone conference call will be held on September 12, 2014.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Vr,

Aaron
#### Arlene Tipping-Cestari et al., Respondents, v Bryant K. Kilhenny et al., Appellants.

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), entered October 17, 1989, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The defendants contend that the plaintiff Arlene TippingCestari failed, as a matter of law, to establish that she sustained a "serious injury” within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). We agree. It is for the court to determine in *664the first instance whether a prima facie showing of "serious injury” has been made out, and summary judgment should be granted where, as here, the plaintiff Tipping-Cestari has failed to meet her burden *(see, Licari v Elliott,*57 NY2d 230; *Palmer v Amaker,*141 AD2d 622). The medical reports submitted by the plaintiffs in opposition to the motion for summary judgment reveal that the plaintiff Tipping-Cestari sustained a cervical and lumbar sprain, with an unspecified degree of restriction of cervical motion. These reports are insufficient to establish that she suffered either "permanent loss of use” or "significant limitation” of a body organ, member, function, or system *(see,*Insurance Law § 5102 [d]; *Maenza v Letkajornsook,*172 AD2d 500; *O’Neill v Rogers,*163 AD2d 466; *Konco v E.T.C. Leasing Corp.,*160 AD2d 680; *Delfino v Davey,*159 AD2d 604). Moreover, her continuing subjective complaints of pain cannot suffice to establish serious injury under the statute *(see, Scheer v Koubek,*70 NY2d 678; *O’Neill v Rogers, supra).*Bracken, J. P., Eiber, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.
# L_2012112EN.01002101.xml

| 24.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 112/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 112/6

---

ACT

ACT

concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Croatia and the adjustments to the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community

PART FIVE

PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS ACT

PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS ACT

TITLE II

APPLICABILITY OF THE ACTS OF THE INSTITUTIONS

APPLICABILITY OF THE ACTS OF THE INSTITUTIONS

Article 49

At the duly substantiated request of Croatia, submitted to the Commission no later than the date of accession, the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission, or the Commission, if the original act was adopted by the Commission, may take measures consisting of temporary derogations from acts adopted by the institutions between 1 July 2011 and the date of accession. The measures shall be adopted according to the voting rules governing the adoption of the act from which a temporary derogation is sought. Where those derogations are adopted after accession, they may be applied as of the date of accession.

---
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 15

- 00092

- CR
Armando Guerra Loya

v. The State of Texas
On Appeal from the 206th District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Cause No. CR

- 1935

- 14

- D

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
November 5 , 2015
# C_2016202EN.01040201.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/402 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/402

---

Article 45

Freedom of movement and of residence

1.   Every citizen of the Union has the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.

2.   Freedom of movement and residence may be granted, in accordance with the Treaties, to nationals of third countries legally resident in the territory of a Member State.

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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       7,996,832
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  194,538
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,191,370
<PP&E>                                      21,837,432
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,362,258
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,666,544
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          396,392
<BONDS>                                      1,103,087
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,167,065
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,666,544
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,850,929
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,569,466
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,447
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                238,016
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            238,016
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   238,016
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>