alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed May 15, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-14-01548-CR

No. 05-14-01549-CR

No. 05-14-01559-CR

No. 05-14-01560-CR

No. 05-14-01561-CR

RONNIE JAMARR CONLEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 10

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. MA13-24802-L, MA13-25397-L, MA14-25147-L,

MA14-25148-L, MA14-25149-L

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeals. Appellant’s counsel has approved 

the motion. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that the appeals be DISMISSED

and this decision be certified below for observance. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a).

PER CURIAM

Do Not Publish

TEX. R. APP. P. 47

141548F.U05
Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

RONNIE JAMARR CONLEY, Appellant

No. 05-14-01548-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court 

No. 10, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. MA13-24802-L.

Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices 

Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered this 15th day of May, 2015.
Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

RONNIE JAMARR CONLEY, Appellant

No. 05-14-01549-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court 

No. 10, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. MA13-24802-L.

Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices 

Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered this 15th day of May, 2015.
Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

RONNIE JAMARR CONLEY, Appellant

No. 05-14-01559-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court 

No. 10, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. MA14-25147-L.

Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices 

Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered this 15th day of May, 2015.
Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

RONNIE JAMARR CONLEY, Appellant

No. 05-14-01560-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court 

No. 10, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. MA14-25148-L.

Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices 

Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered this 15th day of May, 2015.
Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

RONNIE JAMARR CONLEY, Appellant

No. 05-14-01561-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court 

No. 10, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. MA14-25149-L.

Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices 

Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered this 15th day of May, 2015.
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1543

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 30, 1996

Referred to the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities

AN ACT

To clarify the treatment of Nebraska impact aid payments.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 1543 RFH

1 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF IMPACT AID PAYMENTS.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Education shall

3 treat any State as having met the requirements of section

4 5(d)(2)(A) of Public Law 81–874 for fiscal year 1991, and

5 as not having met those requirements for each of the fiscal

6 years 1992, 1993, and 1994, if—

7 (1) its program of State aid was not certified

8 by the Secretary under section 5(d)(2(C)(i) of Public

9 Law 81–874 for any fiscal year before fiscal year

10 1991;

11 (2) the State submitted timely notice under

12 that section of its intention to seek that certification;

13 (3) the Secretary determined that the State did

14 not meet the requirements of section 5(d)(2)(A) of

15 Public Law 81–874 for fiscal year 1991; and

16 (4) it has made a payment to each local edu17 cational agency in the State, other than any local

18 educational agency that received a payment for fiscal

19 year 1991 under section 3(d)(2)(B) of Public Law

20 81–874, whose State aid it reduced for that fiscal

21 year, in the full amount of that reduction.

22 (b) REPAYMENT NOT REQUIRED.—Notwithstanding

23 any other provision of law, any local educational agency

24 in such a State that received funds under section

25 3(d)(2)(B) of Public Law 81–874 for fiscal year 1991
3

S 1543 RFH

1 shall not, by virtue of subsection (a), be required to repay

2 those funds to the Secretary.

Passed the Senate January 26, 1996.

Attest: KELLY D. JOHNSTON,

Secretary.
#### In re William Wise MURRAY, Petitioner.

No. 02-7505.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 5, 2002.

Decided Feb. 10, 2003.

William Wise Murray, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

William Wise Murray petitions for a writ of mandamus. He seeks an order for immediate release from confinement on the ground that the government failed to prove at trial that he used a sawed-off shotgun during the commission of an armed robbery.

*672Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. *See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn.,*860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. *See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court,*426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); *In re Beard,*811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. *See In re United Steelworkers,*595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).

The relief sought by Murray is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 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.

*PETITION DENIED.*
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, 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 11, 2015

Order 

December 11, 2015

152613(65)

THE LUBRIZOL CORPORATION,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Defendant-Appellee.

SC: 152613

COA: 325541

Ct of Claims: 14-000143-MT

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion for the temporary admission of out-ofstate attorneys Jonathan A. Feldman and Eric A. Tresh to appear and practice on behalf 

of plaintiff-appellant under MCR 8.126(A) is GRANTED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          26,856        
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,049,542
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,706
<INVENTORY>                                    833,191
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,913,509
<PP&E>                                       3,390,597
<DEPRECIATION>                                 603,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,630,129
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,386,409
<BONDS>                                      1,468,738            
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,870,335
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,630,129
<SALES>                                     12,952,060
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,969,363
<CGS>                                       12,491,003
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,657,111
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                13,275
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             113,989
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                197,250
<INCOME-TAX>                                    70,281
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            126,969
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   126,969
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


                                   Exhibit 27

                             Financial Data Schedule

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial  information extracted from the audited
consolidated financial statements at December 31, 1998 which are included in the
Registrant's  Form 10-K and is  qualified  in its  entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001012270
<NAME>                        CollaGenex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1
<CASH>                                     3,286
<SECURITIES>                               6,964
<RECEIVABLES>                              3,338
<ALLOWANCES>                               293
<INVENTORY>                                342
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           14,460
<PP&E>                                     383
<DEPRECIATION>                             116
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             14,740
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      5,459
<BONDS>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                                   86
<OTHER-SE>                                 9,195
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               14,740
<SALES>                                    3,053
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           3,461
<CGS>                                      745
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              16,015
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (11,566)
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (11,566)
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                               (11,566)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              (1.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              (1.35)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

RENAISSANCE WORLDWIDE, INC.

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES:

Company                                           State/Country of Organization
------------

1045795 Ontario, Inc.                             Ontario, Canada
ARI National Company                              Massachusetts
America's Registry, Inc.                          Massachusetts
C.M. Management Systems Ltd. Inc.                 Massachusetts
Cambridge Software Group, Inc.                    Massachusetts
COBA Consulting Limited                           U.K.
COBA Group U.S.A., Ltd.                           Georgia
COBA-TC, Inc.                                     Delaware
Eligibility Management Systems, Inc.              Florida
Hunter Consulting Associates Limited              U.K.
Hunter Consulting Associates Pty. Limited         Australia
The Hunter Group, Inc.                            Maryland
The Hunter Group International, Inc.              Delaware
The Hunter Group (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.            Singapore
International Systems Services Corporation        Connecticut
International Systems Services (UK) Limited       U.K.
Renaissance Worldwide AB                          Sweden
The Registry Holding Limited                      U.K.
The Registry, Inc. Network Consulting Practice    New Hampshire
The Registry International, Inc.                  Delaware
The Registry Limited                              U.K.
Renaissance Securities Corp.                      Massachusetts
Renaissance Worldwide Strategy Limited            U.K.
Renaissance Worldwide Professionals, Inc.         California
Renaissance Worldwide Strategy, Inc.              Delaware
Shamrock Computer Resources, Ltd.                 Iowa
Sterling Information Group, Inc.                  Delaware
THG Consulting, Inc.                              Canada
TRI Securities Corp.                              Massachusetts
Technomic Consultants Inc.                        Illinois
Technomic Hong Kong                               Hong Kong
Technomic India*                                  India
Technomic Japan                                   Japan
Technomic Shanghai*                               Shanghai, PRC
Technomic Singapore*                              Singapore
Technomic U.K.                                    U.K.
Technomic Vietnam*                                Vietnam

*Rep. Offices of COBA-TC, Inc.
Rev. 3/4/98
**EXHIBIT32**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Royal Phoenix (the "Company")on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, JosephScott Wilson, President and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

-  The    Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the    Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andThe    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 

/s/            Joseph Scott            Wilson                        
Joseph            Scott Wilson

President            and Chief Accounting Officer

August            13, 2004
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

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

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-20850

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SERGIO MARTINEZ-COSS, also known as Sergio Martinez, also known as Sergio

Coss Martinez, also known as Sergio Martinez Coss,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:08-CR-563-ALL

Before KING, STEWART, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Sergio Martinez-Coss has moved for

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967). Martinez-Coss has not filed a response. Our independent review

of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 17, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
#### Luis J. VALENCIA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. W.F. DALIUS, Warden, LSCI Butner, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 02-7746.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 30, 2003.

Decided Feb. 5, 2003.

*217Luis J. Valencia, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Luis J. Valencia seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” *Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr.,*434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting *United States v. Robinson,*361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on July 5, 2002. Giving Valencia the benefit of Fed. R.App. P. 4(c), the notice of appeal was executed on September 4, 2002, one day beyond the expiration of the appeal period. Because Valencia failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal.

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.

*DISMISSED.*
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I,
Gary S. Jacob, certify that:

1)    I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Callisto Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

2)    Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3)    Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4)    The
registrant's other certifying officer and I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:



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



Date: May 16, 2011

/s/ GARY S. JACOB Gary S. Jacob Chief Executive Officer


---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 99.1

                           CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT
                         AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Adam Mauerberger, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Atlantic Wine
Agencies, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and have:

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

      b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
      quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c) presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
      evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

      a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
      controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
      process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
      registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

      b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
      controls; and

<PAGE>

6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: August 21, 2006

/s/ Adam Mauerberger
Name: Adam Mauerberger
Title: President and Chief Financial Officer
----

----

|   | (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 represents, the financial      condition and results of operations of the  Company. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/      John daCosta                                             |   |   |   |   |
| John      daCostaChief      Financial OfficerAugust      13, 2008 |   |   |   |   |