alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### James Trinity PATTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 29783.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 30, 1958.

James D. Crow, Canadian, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Selling whisky in a dry area is the offense, with punishment assessed at a fine of $250.

The information charged that appellant sold a pint of whisky in Precinct Number 4 of Lipscomb County and that said precinct was a dry area because the sale of beer containing alcohol not exceeding 4% by weight had been prohibited therein by local option election.

The information did not allege whether Precinct Number 4 was a justice precinct or a commissioners’ precinct. This should have been alleged as a necessary description of the area involved.

The evidence fails to support the allegation that the sale was made in Precinct Number 4. The only evidence upon the subject is that the sale was made in the county.

Also, the information should conclude with the phrase, “Against the peace and dignity of the State,” as the Constitution provides (Vernon’s Ann.St.Const. art. 5, § 12). This it did not do.

For the reasons stated, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
Order filed October 24, 2019 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-19-00734-CV

____________

GREGORY GREEN, Appellant

V.

HOUSTON FIREFIGHTERS' RELIEF AND RETIREMENT FUND, 

Appellee

On Appeal from the 129th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2017-46605

O R D E R

The notice of appeal in this case was filed September 20, 2019. To date, the 

filing fee of $205.00 has not been paid. No evidence that appellant is excused by 

statute or the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying costs has been filed. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 5. Therefore, the court issues the following order. 

Appellant is ordered to pay the filing fee in the amount of $205.00 to the clerk 

of this court on or before November 4, 2019. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. If appellant fails 

to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal will be 

dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Spain, and Poissant.
VI

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 558

For the relief of Retired Sergeant First Class James D. Benoit, Wan Sook

Benoit, and the estate of David Benoit, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 15, 1995

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

to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Retired Sergeant First Class James D.

Benoit, Wan Sook Benoit, and the estate of David Benoit, 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. CONSENT TO SUIT.

4 Notwithstanding section 2735 of title 10, United

5 States Code, and any other provision of law, the United

6 States Claims Court shall have jurisdiction to hear, deter7 mine, and render judgment on a claim by Retired Ser8 geant First Class James D. Benoit, Wan Sook Benoit, or

9 the estate of David Benoit concerning the death of David

10 Benoit on June 28, 1983.
2

•S 558 IS

1 SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS PERIOD.

2 Suit on a claim under section 1 may be instituted

3 at any time not later than 1 year after the date of enact4 ment of this Act.

5 SEC. 3. PRIOR SETTLEMENT.

6 Settlement of a claim prior to the date of enactment

7 of this Act shall not bar a claim under section 1. The dam8 ages awarded on a claim under section 1 shall reflect the

9 settlement of a claim prior to the date of enactment of

10 this Act.

11 SEC. 4. NO INFERENCE OF LIABILITY.

12 Nothing in this Act shall be construed as an inference

13 of liability on the part of the United States.

Æ
<PAGE>
                                   EXHIBIT 21
                    SUBSIDIARIES OF DUPONT PHOTOMASKS, INC.
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
NAME                                                                       ORGANIZED UNDER LAWS OF       OWNERSHIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------  ------------------------------  -----------
<S>                                                                     <C>                             <C>
DuPont Dai Nippon Engineering.........................................  Delaware                              50.0%
DuPont Photomasks Company Limited, Shanghai...........................  Peoples Republic of China             60.5%
DuPont Photomasks Delaware, Inc.......................................  Delaware                             100.0%
DuPont Photomasks Foreign Sales Corporation...........................  Barbados                             100.0%
DuPont Photomasks (France) S.A........................................  France                               100.0%
DuPont Photomasks GmbH................................................  Germany                              100.0%
DuPont Photomasks Korea Ltd...........................................  Republic of Korea                    100.0%
DuPont Photomasks UK Limited..........................................  United Kingdom                       100.0%
DPI Reticle Technology Center, LLC....................................  Delaware                              25.0%
</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0466

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

RYAN HUNTER ZITNIK,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until April 20, 2023, to prepare, 

file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 14 2023

03/14/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0466
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID** 

### 07924 **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  

### x 07924\07924_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 07924\07924_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 07924\07924_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted 

### x 07924\07924_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07924\07924_PartB.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07924\07924_PartC.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07924\07924_PartD.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07924\07924_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file



### 07924\Certification Statement_07924.pdf Plant certification statement 

### 07924\Supporting Documentation\07942_Map 1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x '07924\Supporting Documentation\07924_WW Diagram (CBI).pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


                            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 uWink, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ending October 2, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter F. Wilkniss,
Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby
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:

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

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


November 16, 2007                                   By: /s/ PETER F. WILKNISS
                                                        ------------------------
                                                        Peter F. Wilkniss
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                                        Chief Accounting Officer
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS

ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Howard M. Bailey, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Occam Networks, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Occam Networks, Inc.



By:

/s/ Howard M. BaileyName:

Howard M. BaileyTitle:

Chief Financial Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Occam Networks, Inc. and will be retained by Occam Networks, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

August 9, 2012

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Meeting with Edmunds.com, Inc.

FROM: Jeff Alson, US EPA

TO: EPA Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0799

EPA staff had a conference call with Jeremy Anwyl, Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer 

of Edmunds.com, Inc. on January 13, 2012. The topic of the phone call was the possible 

consumer response to the EPA/NHTSA Proposed Rulemaking for Greenhouse Gas and CAFE 

Standards for Model Year 2017-2025 Light-Duty Vehicles. 

The Edmunds.com representative was Jeremy Anwyl.

EPA representatives were William Charmley and Jeff Alson.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, the undersigned, as principal financial officer of SMTC Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the undersigned’s knowledge: 

1) the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 3, 2010 fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2) theinformation contained in the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 3, 2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

Date: November 12, 2010

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SMTC Corporation and will beretained by SMTC Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 21

                                  SUBSIDIARIES
                                                                     % of
                                                                   Ownership
                                                                       by
                             Name of Company                      TV Filme, Inc.
-------------------------------------------------------------     --------------

ITSA-Intercontinental Telecomunicacoes Ltda.,                         99(1)
a Brazilian limited liability company

Filme Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation                              100

TV Filme Servicos de Telecomunicacoes Ltda.,                          49(2)
a Brazilian limited liability company

TV Filme Brasilia de Telecomunicacoes Ltda., a Brazilian
limited liability company                                             99(1)

TV Filme Goiania de Telecomunicacoes Ltda., a Brazilian               99(1)
limited liability company

TV Filme Belem de Telecomunicacoes Ltda., a Brazilian                 99(1)
limited liability company

TV Filme of Cayman, Ltd., a Cayman Island limited partnership         99(1)

ITSA of Cayman, Ltd., a Cayman Island limited partnership               (3)

TV FILME Programadora Ltda., a  Brazilian limited liability
company                                                               99(4)


---------------------
(1)   The remaining 1% interest is held by Filme Sub, Inc.
(2)   The remaining 51% is owned by TVTEL Ltda.
(3)   Owned  99%  by  ITSA-Intercontinental  Telecomunicacoes Ltda. and 1% by TV
      Filme Brasilia de Telecomunicacoes Ltda.
(4)   Owned  99%  by  ITSA-Intercontinental  Telecomunicacoes  Ltda.  and  1% by
      Filme Sub., Inc.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


                            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 uWink, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lawrence C. Early,
Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby
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:

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

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



November 15, 2004                  By: /S/ LAWRENCE C. EARLY
                                       ----------------------------
                                           Lawrence C. Early
                                           Chief Financial Officer
                                           Chief Accounting Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8233

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

CASUAL BIANCA LYONS,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, 

District Judge. (5:03-cr-00312-BO-1)

Submitted: April 22, 2010 Decided: April 27, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Casual Bianca Lyons, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., 

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Casual Bianca Lyons seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying her motion for new counsel on her 18 

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. This court may exercise 

jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), 

and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. 

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Lyons seeks to 

appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory 

or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for 

lack of jurisdiction. 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
p130559.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 13-0559 Focus Ready Draft 7/8/2013

ENGINEER: Choudhary \ DDH PV (kg/yr):

SUBMITTER: Reichhold, Inc.

%

Page 1p130559.eng

Consumer Use: No

SAT (concerns) (06/28/2013):
Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P3B1T1

Health: 1-2 Inhalation Eco: 2 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 60 ppb)

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 2-3B

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

Page 2p130559.eng to the same medium. Note: migration is negl per SAT and incineration releases < 28,000 kg/site-day (acute) and 698,000 kg/site-yr (chronic).

Water or Incineration or Landfill High End: 1.9E+0 kg/site-day over 170 days/yr from 1 site or 3.3E+2 kg/yr

Water or Incineration or Landfill Conservative: 8.8E-1 kg/site-day over 250 days/yr from 1

site or 2.2E+2 kg/yr

Air Output 2: 3.3E+0 kg/site-day over 250 days/yr from 1 site

Landfill Output 2: 3.0E+1 kg/site-day over 250 days/yr from 1 site or 7.4E+3 kg/yr

RELEASE TOTAL 8.8E+3 kg/yr - all sites

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Page 6p130559.eng

Page 7
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned hereby certifies that the Form 10-K Annual Report of Mandalay Resort Group (the "Company") for the annual period ended January 31, 2003
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78m(a) or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: April 30, 2003 |  | /s/MICHAEL S. ENSIGNMichael S. Ensign, Chairman of the
Board,
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Operating Officer of Mandalay Resort Group
|-------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

---

QuickLinks
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 475 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  1st Session
                                 S. 475

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To authorize a certificate of documentation for the vessel LADY HAWK.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
sections 12106, 12107, and 12108 of title 46, United States Code, and 
section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), as 
applicable on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation for the vessel 
LADY HAWK, United States official number 961095.

            Passed the Senate July 29, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
104th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 475

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To authorize a certificate of documentation for the vessel LADY HAWK.
```
Order entered December 29, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00212-CR

No. 05-14-00213-CR

JOE POLANCO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 401-81063-2011, 401-80435-2012

ORDER

The Court DENIES appellant’s December 21, 2015 pro se “corrected motion to 

reconsider appellant’s motion to stay mandate.”

No further motions will be entertained regarding issuance of the mandate.

/s/ ROBERT M. FILLMORE 

JUSTICE
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-4434

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DERICK A. GEIGER,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 03-4622

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LORENZO MAURICE VENSON, a/k/a C. C.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph Robert Goodwin,

District Judge. (CR-01-261)

Submitted: April 14, 2004 Decided: May 4, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
- 2 -

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald L. Stennett, Charleston, West Virginia; Herbert L. Hively,

II, Hurricane, West Virginia, for Appellants. Charles T. Miller,

Acting United States Attorney, Monica K. Schwartz, Assistant United

States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Derick A. Geiger and Lorenzo Maurice Venson appeal their

sentences imposed following guilty plea convictions for conspiracy

to distribute and possess with intent to distribute more than 50

grams of cocaine base and more than 100 kilograms of marijuana, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000). 

Venson and Geiger contend that the district court

erroneously calculated their relevant conduct because the coconspirator testimony upon which the calculation was based was

unreliable.

The district court’s determination of the drug quantity

attributable to a defendant is a factual finding reviewed for clear

error. United States v. Randall, 171 F.3d 195, 210 (4th Cir.

1999). In determining drug quantity, a district court must

consider whether the government has established the amount by a

preponderance of the evidence. United States v. Cook, 76 F.3d 596,

604 (4th Cir. 1996). “In reviewing sentences imposed under the

[United States Sentencing] Guidelines, [this court] must give due

regard to the opportunity of the district court to judge the

credibility of the witnesses.” United States v. Sampson, 140 F.3d

585, 591 (4th Cir. 1998) (internal quotation marks and citation

omitted). 

Giving due deference to the district court’s opportunity

to judge the credibility of the witnesses, we reject Appellants’
- 4 -

related claim that the district court erred in finding coconspirator testimony to be credible. Sampson, 140 F.3d at 591.

Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not err in

calculating the amount of narcotics attributed to both Venson and

Geiger. Cook, 76 F.3d at 604; Randall, 171 F.3d at 210. 

We affirm both Venson’s and Geiger’s convictions and

sentences. We reject Appellants’ request for oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-17-00347-CR

TREVEON DEON WILLIAMS,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 278th District Court

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 27685

REINSTATEMENT ORDER

This appeal was abated to the trial court on October 10, 2018 because no brief had 

been filed for appellant. Appellant’s brief was received by the Court on October 30, 2018. 

Accordingly, this appeal is reinstated. Appellant’s brief is filed as of the date it

was received. The State’s brief in this appeal is due 30 days from the date of this Order.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal reinstated

Order issued and filed November 7, 2018
## cX/»l/2 ^ i-^ARTMENTO F A^JSPORTMIO N fi^TOPTIONS - 

# g^i^ , 4^^/^rP^ ^ A< ^ A^^-ic-^r^^ ^ ^ ' ^ - li/^/nAdJ k 3UA 3 

### <C^c;/u-fK-M- A iVh'/J<^- ^



## /Tyt^^TKsypjfM

^ ydji SopQooMy< ^ 'Ujj^^^^r^ ^

OT^^AA\ \xcf

^ \ ^ ' \ 

## S>i o 

# H ^ Carolin e Reynne t

25 6 W.Gran d Rive rAve . Okemos , M l 48864-310 4