alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 20, 2016

No. 04-16-00633-CR

Gabriel Antonio VALVERDE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CR4166W

Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The appellant’s brief was originally due to be filed on November 21, 2016. The 

appellant’s first motion for extension of time was granted, extending the deadline for filing the 

brief to December 21, 2016. On December 19, 2016, the appellant filed a motion requesting an 

additional extension of time to file the brief until January 21, 2017, for a total extension of sixty 

days. The motion is GRANTED. THIS IS THE FINAL EXTENSION OF TIME THAT 

THE APPELLANT WILL BE GRANTED. The Appellant’s brief must be filed by January 

23, 2017.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 20th day of December, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

     The  undersigned  constitutes and appoints Jon Ehlinger his true and lawful
attorney-in-fact  and agent with full power of substitution and  resubstitution,
for him and in his name,  place,  and stead, in any and all capacities,  to sign
the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended  December 31, 2000, for
filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission by Ugly Duckling Corporation,
a Delaware corporation,  together with any and all amendments to such Form 10-K,
and to file the same with all exhibits thereto,  and all documents in connection
therewith,  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission,  granting  to such
attorneys-in-fact  and agents,  and each of them, full power and authority to do
and perform each and every act and thing  requisite  and necessary to be done in
and about the premises,  as fully and to all intents and purposes as he might or
could  do  in  person,   hereby   ratifying   and   confirming   all  that  such
attorneys-in-fact  and agents,  or each of them,  may lawfully do or cause to be
done by virtue hereof.



                                                DATED: April 16, 2001


                                                /S/ JOHN N. MACDONOUGH
                                                --------------------------------
                                                John N. MacDonough

<PAGE>



STATE OF _______________ )

                         )

County of ______________ )



     On this ____ day of  _________,  2001,  before me, the  undersigned  Notary
Public,  personally  appeared John N.  MacDonough,  known to me to be the person
whose name is  subscribed  to the within  instrument  and  acknowledged  that he
executed the same for the purposes therein contained.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.



                                                --------------------------------
                                                Notary Public

My commission expires:
EXHIBIT 21.1

                        AVIATION COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES

                       LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

Aviation Sales Distribution Services Company (wholly-owned subsidiary)

         Aviation Sales Bearings Company (wholly-owned subsidiary of Aviation
         Sales Distribution Services Company)

Aviation Sales Leasing Company (wholly-owned subsidiary)

         Aviation Sales SPS I, Inc. (wholly-owned subsidiary of Aviation Sales
         Leasing Company)

         Aero Hushkit Corporation (wholly-owned subsidiary of Aviation Sales
         Leasing Company)

Aviation Sales Finance Company (wholly-owned subsidiary)

Aviation Sales Manufacturing Company ("ASM") (wholly-owned subsidiary)

           AVS/Kratz-Wilde Machine Company (wholly-owned subsidiary of ASM)

           Apex Manufacturing, Inc.  (wholly-owned subsidiary of ASM)

Aviation Sales Company FSC, Ltd.  (wholly-owned subsidiary)

Aviation Sales Maintenance, Repair & Overhaul Company ("ASMRO")
(wholly-owned subsidiary)

           Triad International Maintenance Corporation (wholly-owned subsidiary
           of ASMRO)

           Aerocell Structures, Inc.  (wholly-owned subsidiary of ASMRO)

           Caribe Aviation, Inc.  (wholly-owned subsidiary of ASMRO)

                  Aircraft Interior Design, Inc.  (wholly-owned subsidiary of
                  Caribe Aviation, Inc.)

           Whitehall Corporation ("Whitehall") (wholly-owned subsidiary of
           ASMRO)

                  Hydroscience, Inc. (wholly-owned subsidiary of Whitehall)

Aviation Sales Property Management Corp. ("ASPM") (wholly-owned subsidiary)

           AVSRE, L.P. (a limited partnership of which ASPM is the sole general
           partner and Whitehall is the sole limited partner)
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 29 , 2012.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14 - 12 - 00392 - CV HELEN MAYFIELD , Appellant

V. JOHN CUOCO, STEVE FU LLJART, KBTX NEWS, a Corporation , and GRAY

COMMUNICATIONS, a Corporation, Appellee s On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2011 - 26159 

### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N On January 10, 2012, appellant filed a notice of appeal from a December 13, 2011, final summary judgment. The appeal was assigned to this court and docketed under our case number 14

- 12

- 00037

- CV. Appellant also filed an affidavit of indigence, and the Harris County District Clerk filed a contest to the affidavit. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on April 21, 2012, statin g that she seeks to appeal an order signed April 16, 2012 , denying of her claim of indigency. Appellant’s second appeal was docketed under our case number 14

- 12

- 00392

- CV.2

Rule 20.1 allows a party to proceed on appeal without advance payment of costs if (1) the party files an affidavit of indigence in compliance with the rule, (2) either the claim of indigence is not contested or the contest is not sustained, and (3) the party timely files a notice of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(a)(1)

- (3); see also Morris v . Aguilar , 369 S.W.3d 168, 170 n.3 (Tex. 2012). We may review an order sustaining a contest when there is a pending appeal from a final judgment or other appealable order. Tex. R. App. P. 20.1; In re Arroyo , 98 8 S.W.2d 737, 738

– 39 (Tex.1998); In re Velez

- U resti , 361 S.W.3d 200, 202

- 03 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 2012, pet. denied). This court ordered a partial clerk’s record containing the documents relevant to appellant’s claim of indigence. In addition, we abated the related appeal from the summary judgment in cas e number 14

- 12

- 00037

- CV until the indigence appeal has been decided. The indigence record has now been filed. The record reflects that on April 16, 2012, the trial court signed an order overruling the Harris County District Clerk’s contest to appellant’ s a ff

idavit . Therefore, appellant is entitled to proceed without the advance payment of costs in case number 14

- 12

- 00037

- CV. Accordingly, this appeal is moot. See Whittaker v. U.S. Mail Serv ., 14

- 11

- 00475

- CV, 2011 WL 3585991 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Au g. 16, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (stating that because appellant challeng ed the denial of his claim of indigence, the trial court’s ruling upholding his claim of indigence and finding that he wa s unable to pay filing fees render ed the challenge moot). On N ovember 7 , 2012, notification was transmitted to all parties of the court’ s intention to dismiss this appeal
. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). N o response was filed. We dismiss this appeal as moot . The appeal pending in case number 14

- 12

- 00037

- CV remains pendi ng before the court and is ordered reinstated by separate order. PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Seymore, Boyce, and McCally.
Exhibit 32.3

Statement

Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the
undersigned officer of Paperweight Development Corp. (the Company), hereby certifies that to his knowledge:



| | (1) | the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 1, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                               |  |                                                
|------------------- |  | ----------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------
|                    |  | PAPERWEIGHT DEVELOPMENT CORP.
|                    |  |                              
|Dated: May 14, 2007 |  |                               |  | /s/ Mark R. Richards                           
|                    |  | Name:                         |  | Mark R. Richards                               
|                    |  | Title:                        |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MediCor Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jim J. McGhan, Chief Operating 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 to the best of my knowledge:

|/s/JIM J. MCGHANJim J. McGhan
Chief Operating Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|                                                                                    |  | 
|May 15, 2003                                                                        |  | 

---

QuickLinks
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 190

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to exempt employees

who perform certain court reporting duties from the compensatory time

requirements applicable to certain public agencies, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 10, 1995

Mr. PRESSLER (for himself and Mrs. KASSEBAUM) introduced the following

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and

Human Resources

A BILL

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to exempt

employees who perform certain court reporting duties

from the compensatory time requirements applicable to

certain public agencies, and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘The Court Reporter

5 Fair Labor Amendments of 1995’’.
2

S 190 IS

1 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON COMPENSATORY TIME FOR COURT

2 REPORTERS.

3 Section 7(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

4 (29 U.S.C. 207(o)) is amended—

5 (1) by redesignating paragraph (6) as para6 graph (7); and

7 (2) by inserting after paragraph (5) the follow8 ing new paragraph:

9 ‘‘(6) A public agency may not be considered to be

10 in violation of subsection (a) with respect to an employee

11 who performs court reporting transcript preparation du12 ties if such public agency and such employee have an un13 derstanding that the time spent performing such duties

14 outside of normal working hours or regular working days

15 is not considered as hours worked for the purposes of sub16 section (a).’’.

17 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AMENDMENTS.

18 The amendments made by section 2 shall take effect

19 as if included in the provisions of the Fair Labor Stand20 ards Act of 1938 to which such amendments relate, except

21 that such amendments shall not apply to an action—

22 (1) that was brought in a court involving the

23 application of section 7(a) of such Act to an em24 ployee who performed court reporting transcript

25 preparation duties; and
3

S 190 IS

1 (2) in which a final judgment has been entered

2 on or before the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          14,294
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,785
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (24,798)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                57,583
<PP&E>                                         134,282
<DEPRECIATION>                                (43,611)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 238,304
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,932
<BONDS>                                        161,116
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     37,096
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,007
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   238,304
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               161,992
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  128,307
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,193
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,618
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,922
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,190)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,112
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,112
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.65


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 21 (Wednesday, January 31, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6136-6137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-01892]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0025]


Hydrostatic Testing Provision of the Standard on Portable Fire 
Extinguishers; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) 
Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 
published a document in the Federal Register on January 9, 2024, 
soliciting public comments concerning the proposal to extend the Office 
of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the information collection 
requirements specified in the regulation on Hydrostatic Testing 
Provision of the Standard on Portable Fire Extinguishers. The document 
contained an incorrect OMB Control Number. This notice corrects this 
error.

DATES: This correction is effective January 31, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seleda Perryman or Theda Kenney, 
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor; 
telephone: (202) 693-2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of January 9, 2024 (89 FR 1129), correct 
the OMB Control Number as described below.
    On page 1129--in the third column the section titled ``III. 
Proposed Actions'' listed under OMB Control Number change 1219-0218 to 
read:
    [1218-0218].
* * * * *

Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for 
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this 
notice. The authority

[[Page 6137]]

for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 
et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on January 25, 2024.
James S. Frederick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2024-01892 Filed 1-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
#### Charles Lee Marduk KNIGHT EL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 02-7892.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 6, 2003.

Decided Feb. 13, 2003.

Charles Lee Marduk Knight El, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Charles Lee Marduk Knight El seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability ■will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it *711debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’ ” *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that El has not made the requisite showing. *See El v. Angelone,*No. CA-02-250-3 (E.D.Va. Nov. 19, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and 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.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1997
<CASH>                                           4,537
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   68,138
<ALLOWANCES>                                    52,035
<INVENTORY>                                    112,366
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               230,763
<PP&E>                                          62,209
<DEPRECIATION>                                (31,204)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 287,488
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          150,774
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           216
<OTHER-SE>                                     122,248
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   287,488
<SALES>                                        638,725
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               638,725
<CGS>                                          517,318
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  517,318
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               212,723
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (3,075)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (92,396)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (11,034)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (81,362)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (81,362)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.78)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14 AND 15d-14
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
             /s/ Michael R. RodriguezMichael R. RodriguezSenior Vice President, Finance and
Chief Financial Officer
(Co-Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2090 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2090

     To provide for the conveyance of certain land in the State of 
                 California to the Hoopa Valley Tribe.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 18, 1996

  Mrs. Boxer introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To provide for the conveyance of certain land in the State of 
                 California to the Hoopa Valley Tribe.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Hoopa Valley Reservation South 
Boundary Adjustment Act''.

SEC. 2. LAND TRANSFER TO RESERVATION.

    (a) In General.--All right, title, and interest of the United 
States in and to the lands described in subsection (b) shall hereafter 
be held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Hoopa 
Valley Tribe and shall be part of the Hoopa Valley Reservation.
    (b) Lands Described.--The lands referred to in subsection (a) are 
those portions of Townships 7 North and 8 North, Ranges 5 East and 6 
East, Humboldt Meridian, California, within a boundary beginning at a 
point on the current south boundary of the Hoopa Valley Indian 
Reservation, marked and identified as ``Post H.V.R. No. 8'' on the Plat 
of the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation prepared from a field survey 
conducted by C.T. Bissel, Augustus T. Smith and C.A. Robinson, Deputy 
Surveyors, approved by the Surveyor General, H. Pratt, March 18, 1892, 
and extending from said point on a bearing of north 72 degrees 30 
minutes east, until intersecting with a line beginning at a point 
marked as ``Post H.V.R. No. 3'' on said survey and extending on a 
bearing of south 15 degrees 59 minutes east, comprising 2,641 acres 
more or less.
    (c) Boundary Adjustment.--The boundary of the Six Rivers National 
Forest shall be adjusted to exclude the lands to be held in trust for 
the benefit of the Hoopa Valley Tribe pursuant to this section.

SEC. 3. SURVEY.

    The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Land 
Management, shall survey and monument that portion of the boundary of 
the Hoopa Valley Reservation established by the addition of lands made 
by section 2.
                                 <all>
```