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

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Oddis Dunn v. Park Harbor Improvement Association, Inc. and Its 

Commercial Members

Appellate case number: 01-21-00010-CV

Trial court case number: 2020-06897

Trial court: 234th District Court of Harris County

Appellant’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw and appellant is in agreement with his 

counsel’s withdrawal. Accordingly, we grant the motion to withdraw.

Before counsel withdrew, counsel had filed appellant’s brief. Appellant has asked that we 

permit him to proceed pro se. Appellant has also filed a motion to strike the brief filed by counsel 

because appellant tendered a pro se appellant’s brief. We grant the motion to strike and strike the

appellant’s brief filed on July 2, 2021. Because the Court has granted the motion to withdraw, 

appellant may proceed pro se. As construed to be a motion to permit appellant to proceed pro se, 

the motion to reconsider is also granted.

The Court has reviewed appellant’s pro se brief and has determined that it does not comply 

with the Rule 38.1 requirements. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. Appellant’s pro se brief fails to include 

the following: 

(1) an index of authorities, see TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(c); 

(2) a statement of the case supported by record references, see TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(d);

(3) a statement regarding oral argument, see TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(e); 

(4) citations to the record in the statement of facts, see TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(g);

(5) a summary of the argument, see TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(h);

(6) argument containing both citations to the record and to authorities, see TEX. R. APP. P.

38.1(i); and

(7) a prayer for relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(j).

We strike appellant’s brief filed on August 3, 2021, and order appellant to file a brief 

correcting the deficiencies listed and in compliance with Rule 38.1 on or before September 23, 

2021. Appellee’s brief will be due 30 days after appellant files a corrected brief. 
It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: _____/s/ Richard Hightower____

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __August 26, 2021____
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-41346 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MICHAEL GLEN SEYMOUR, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:03-CR-41-3

-------------------- Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Michael Glen Seymour appeals his conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. On appeal, Seymour challenges only the district court’s failure to hold an evidentiary hearing on his oral motion to suppress evidence. Because his motion to suppress was not made until the middle of the trial, the district court denied it as untimely. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D June 22, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 03-41346 -2- A motion to suppress evidence must be made before trial.
F ED . R. C RIM . P. 12(b)(3)(C). Failure to raise a motion by the deadline results in a waiver of the objection. F ED . R. C RIM . P. 12(e). An evidentiary hearing is required on a motion to suppress “only when necessary to receive evidence on an issue of fact.” United States v. Harrelson , 705 F.2d 733, 737 (5th Cir. 1983). This court reviews a district court’s refusal to conduct an evidentiary hearing on a motion to suppress for abuse of discretion. Id. Because the district court denied the motion to suppress as untimely, the district court did not abuse its discretion by not holding an evidentiary hearing on its substantive merits. Seymour’s appellate brief does not address the district court’s conclusion that his motion to suppress was untimely; therefore, we will not consider this issue on appeal. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224 (5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.
II 

Calendar No. 598 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4913 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 17, 2018 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2018 

Reported by Mr. JOHNSON, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 816 East Salisbury Parkway in Salisbury, 

Maryland, as the ‘‘Sgt. Maj. Wardell B. Turner Post 

Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SGT. MAJ. WARDELL B. TURNER POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 816 East Salisbury Parkway in 

7 Salisbury, Maryland, shall be known and designated as the 

8 ‘‘Sgt. Maj. Wardell B. Turner Post Office Building’’. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4913 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sgt. Maj. Wardell 

5 B. Turner Post Office Building’’. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS

dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 598 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4913 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostWardell B. Turner Post Office Building’’. in Salisbury, Maryland, as the ‘‘Sgt. Maj. al Service located at 816 East Salisbury Parkway 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2018 

Reported without amendment 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>



                     32.2 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CFO

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund IV,
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Kimberly A. Springsteen, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Kimberly A. Springsteen
---------------------------
Kimberly A. Springsteen
Principal Financial Officer
November 14, 2005
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

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel, February 13, 2024, 10:00 a.m. to February 14, 2024, 05:00 p.m., National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 301 North Stonestreet Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on November 24, 2023, FR Doc 2023-25938, 88 FR 82387.                

                    This notice is being amended to change the meeting date from February 13-14, 2024 to February 14, 2024. The meeting time and location will remain                           ( print page 2628)                        the same. The meeting is closed to the public.                

Dated: January 10, 2024.

Lauren A. Fleck,

Program Analyst,  Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2024-00667 Filed 1-12-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
exv10w38






Exhibit 10.38




Addendum to Mortgage Selling and Servicing Contract



This addendum modifies the Mortgage Selling and Servicing Contract (the “Contract”) dated
August 6, 1997 between the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”), “we”,
“our”, “us”), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the United States and
Centex Home Equity Company LLC (24147-000-8) (The “Lender”).



The purpose of the Contract is to establish the Lender as an approved seller and Servicer of
mortgages and participation interests, and to provide the terms and conditions of the sale and
servicing of mortgages. Section XVI B of the Contract identifies the categories of mortgages and
participation interests that the Contract covers. The purpose of this Addendum is to change the
name of the Lender to:




Change lender name to Nationstar Mortgage LLC



All other terms of the Contract, including any previous modification made to it, remain in effect.



By executing this Addendum, the Lender and we agree to the modification. The modification takes
effect on the date we sign this Addendum.




	 	 	 	 	 

	Lender:

	 	NationStar Mortgage, LLC
	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	2828 North Harwood, Suite 11	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Address)	 	 
	 

	 	Dallas, TX 75201	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ Shawn Stone	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Authorized Signature)	 	 
	 

	 	Shawn Stone, EVP, Secondary Marketing
 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Date:

	 	9/8/06	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Federal National Mortgage Association	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	1 South Wacker Drive	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Address)	 	 
	 

	 	Suite 1300	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Chicago, IL 60606-4667	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ Bruce Honaker	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Authorized Signature)	 	 
	 

	 	Bruce Honaker, Assistant Vice President	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Type Name and Title)	 	 
	Date:

	 	9/12/06
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 2 8 , 2024

NO. 03
- 23
- 00100
- CV

Texas Health and Human Services Commission , Appellant

v. Julius Kadia , Appellee

APPEAL FROM T HE 345TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JU STIC ES B AKER, KELLY, AND SMITH AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND RENDERED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART
-- OPINION BY JUSTICE KELLY

This is an appeal from the interloc utor y order si gned by the district court on January 31, 2023

. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was reversible
error in the district cour t’s interl ocutory order

. Therefore, the Court reverses the district court ’s interl ocutor y order in part and r enders judgment dismiss ing with prejudice Appellee ’s claims (a) that he was disciplined and then for 18 months deprived of employment benefits, sa lary incr eases, and consideration for promotion, all in response to his March 2019 refusa l to complete an assignment, insofar as these claims re ly on acts or omissions occurring outside the claim

preserv ation periods; (b) for retaliatory failure to hire or promote under job postings 412525, 446331, 476353, 478865, 479271, 487689, 494328, 49433 3, 498873, 498874, 499232, 500734, 500744, 501943, 507504, 507534, 507562, 507639, 507648, 507673, 507682, 507710, 507712,2

507714, 507716, and 507881; and (c) t hat the Commiss ion denied him overtime in July 2019

. Further, the court reverses the interlocut ory order in part and remands the ca se for Appellee t o replead (a) his claim for any denials of overtime that occurred outside of the claim

- preserv ation periods to sta te suffic ient facts to bring the claim within the Gupta exception ; (b) his claim for the denial of his request to work as a nurse during staffing shortages insofar as the claim relies on acts or omissions occurring outside of the claim

- preserv ation periods to bring the claim within the Gupta exception ; (c) his claim based on being encouraged t o resign to state sufficient facts to show either exhaustion of remedies or the Gupta exception ; and (d) his retaliation claim for bullying, harassment, assigned tasks , write

- u ps, or denied compensation, any of which occur red after November 2, 2020, to bri ng the claim within the Gupta exception

. Further, the Court
ot herwise affirms the interlo cutory order

. A ppell ant shall pay one - half of all costs relating to this
appe al, both in this Court and in t he court below , and Appellee shall pay one

- half of all co sts relating to this appeal, both in th is Court and in the court below

.
EXHIBIT 12.4

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 Annual Report of Elbit Vision Systems Ltd. (the Company)
on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Yaky Yanay, Chief
Financial 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 to
my knowledge:

|3.                | the Report
  fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities
  Exchange Act of 1934; and                                        
|----------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                  |                                                                                                                                                         
|4.                | the
  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|                  |                                                                                                                                                         
|                  | /S/ YAKY
  YANAY                                                                                                                                        
|                  | Yaky Yanay                                                                                                                                              
|June 29th,
  2004 | Chief
  Financial Officer                                                                                                                               
|                  |                                                                                                                                                         

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

91

---

---
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of Landmark Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark A. Herpich,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

                (1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

              (2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
|  /s/ Mark A. Herpich |   |
|---------------------------|--------|
| Mark A. Herpich           |
| Chief Financial Officer   |
| May 15, 2009         |

 

----
#### WESTERN FARMERS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, a Corporation of Anadarko, Oklahoma, Plaintiff In Error, v. O. E. KAUFMAN and Mrs. O. E. Kaufman, Defendants in Error.

No. 36491.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

Sept. 27, 1955.

H. C. Ivester, Sayre, Harry C. Hicks, Hollis, for plaintiff in error.

Oden & Oden, Ryan Kerr, Yates & Braddock, Altus, for defendants in error.

DAVISON, Justice. ■

Except for the amount of the verdict and judgment and the identity of the land involved and of the defend*734ants, the instant case presents generally the same issues as were in cause number 36485, Western Farmers Electric Cooperative v. Yates, 288 P.2d 723. However, the case at bar does not involve exceptional damage to an isolated field as did the Yates case, supra, and consequentially the verdict was materially less. The testimony of the different witnesses as to the amount of damage varied widely, ranging from amounts considerably below the amount of the judgment to amounts considerably above the same. The clear weight of the evidence, however, amply supported the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court based thereon.

The same reasoning and rules of law being here controlling, the opinion in said cause number 36485 is adopted as the opinion herein.

Judgment affirmed.

JOHNSON, C. J., WILLIAMS, V. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, BLACKBIRD, and JACKSON, JJ.j concur.

HALLEY, J., dissents.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 129 (Friday, September 21, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1602]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

            HONORING SENIOR MASTER SERGEANT EMILIO HERNANDEZ

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. MARIO DIAZ-BALART

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 20, 2012

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I proudly rise today to honor Senior 
Master Sergeant Emilio Hernandez, an exceptional individual who has 
most recently been awarded the 2012 Outstanding Airman of the Year 
award by the United States Air Force. This prestigious award is given 
to only 12 members of the Air Force each year for their superior 
leadership, job performance, community involvement, and personal 
achievements.
  SMSgt Hernandez was born in Havana, Cuba but grew up in Miami, FL. He 
graduated from Hialeah High School in 1990 and began his military 
career in 1992, serving at both Sheppard AFB in Texas and K.I. Sawyer 
Air Force Base in Michigan. He was deployed to Incirlik Air Base in 
Turkey later that year in support of Operation PROVIDE COMFORT where he 
garnered two achievement medals, and was selected as a holiday phone 
call recipient from then President Bill Clinton. His decorated service 
history includes deployments to Kuwait in support of Operation SOUTHERN 
WATCH, and Baghdad in support of both Operations IRAQI FREEDOM and 
ENDURING FREEDOM.
  In 2008, SMSgt Hernandez was assigned to his current position in the 
100th Civil Engineer Squadron as Superintendent Operations Flight at 
RAF Mildenhall in the United Kingdom. In 2009 he deployed to Ali Base 
Iraq, where he served as Electrical Superintendent of the 407th 
Expeditionary Civil Engineer Squadron and received the Meritorious 
Service Medal. Later, he was selected as the 100th Civil Engineer 
Squadron's 2009 Senior Noncommissioned Officer of the year. In 2011 
SMSgt Hernandez was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for his service at 
Kandahar Airfield as the Operations Flight Chief of the 777th 
Expeditionary Prime BEEF Squadron.
  In his current position, SMSgt Hernandez has led 52 people in 53 
civil engineering projects at 163 forward operating bases in support of 
85,000 warfighters. He orchestrated $80,000 in repairs to nine Marine 
Corps aircraft hangers to safeguard $300 million in assets in support 
of a vital ISR platform. He oversaw a project to upgrade an electrical 
grid on a dam which preserved water and power flow to 450,000 Afghans, 
and managed the construction of two tactical operations centers worth 
$500,000, securing Afghanistan's key district of Panjwai.
  Mr. Speaker, I am honored to pay tribute to Senior Master Sergeant 
Emilio Hernandez for his continued service to our nation, and I ask my 
colleagues to join me in recognizing this remarkable individual.

                          ____________________
```
#### Ex parte McCAIN.

No. 36017.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

Nov. 3, 1953.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 24, 1953.

Willis R. Stark, Oklahoma City, for petitioner.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., for respondent.

HALLEY, Chief Justice.

This cause coming on for decision upon an application for a writ of habeas corpus for Mildred McCain, a similar application having been presented in the District Court of Cleveland County and there denied, and this court having considered the application, and the response, and the briefs, and having heard the matter in open court, and considered the exhibits and the evidence;

And it appearing that the application is based upon alleged deficiency or error in the proceedings on which the County Court made the Order of Admission of Mildred McCain to the Central State Hospital on account oí her mental illness, but that the application and the oral presentation suggest no right of petitioner to be presently discharged from such Hospital, and do not urge the propriety of petitioner’s present release and discharge.

Therefore upon consideration of all of the foregoing statements the court finds that the application for writ of habeas corpus should be denied for apparent lack of beneficial merit.

The court deems it unnecessary to further state or discuss the facts presented, or the law applicable to such Orders of Admission, or the various methods provided by law for releasing or obtaining the discharge or dismissal of patients from the State Hospital, when any such patient should be or may be released or discharged with due propriety and safety. -S.B. 45Q, Title 12, O.S.1953 Supp. § 976, S.L.19S3, p. 56.

For the reasons stated, the writ is denied.