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

13-21-00061-CV

Gabriel Miranda Jr., deceased, Maria Fuentes, Gabriel Miranda Sr., Alexandra Suzanne 

DeLeon, Reuben Antonio DeLeon III, and Jon Hidalgo Doe

v.

Norma Jean Farley

On Appeal from the

398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. C-4899-17-I(1)

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause 

remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED 

and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. Costs of the appeal 

are adjudged against appellee.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 6, 2022
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T T R AC Y R OME R O F OL E Y, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. M. AN C HE T A, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 17129 D . C . N o. 1: 08 -c v-00 76 9-D C B -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia D a vi d C . B ury , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M ay25, 2010 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , T H O M A S , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T r a c yR om e r o F ol e y , aC a l i f orni as t a t e pr i s one r , appe a l s pr o s e f r om the d is tr ic t c o u rt’s ju d g m e n t d is m is s in g h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 a c tio n f o rf a ilu r e to 

# FI LED JU N 15 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 17129 2 e x h au s ta d mi n i s tr a t i v e r e me d i e s u n d e rth e Pr i s o n Li t i g a t i o n Re f o rm A c t , 4 2 U . S. C. § 1997e ( a ) . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w de novo the di stri ctcourt ’ s di sm i ss alfor f ai l ure t o exh aust , and for cl ear e rr or i t s f ac tual d e te rm in a tio n s , W

y at t v . T e rhune , 3 1 5 F . 3 d1 1 0 8 , 1 1 1 7 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 3 ) , an dwe a f f i rm . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyd is m is s e dF o le y ’s E ig h th A m e n d m e n t c la im b e c au s e h e f

a ile dto e x h au s t a d m in is tr a tiv e r e m e d ie s p r io rto f ilin g s u it. See W oodf ord v . N go , 548 U . S . 81, 93- 95 ( 2006) ( hol di ng tha t“ pr ope re xhaus t i on” unde r42 U . S . C . § 1997e ( a ) i s m anda t oryand r e qui r e s a dhe r e nc e t o a dm i ni s tr a t i ve p r o c e du r a l ru le s ) ; G r iffin v . A r p a io , 557 F . 3d 1117, 1120 ( 9th C i r . 2009) (a ff irm in g d ism issa l fo r f

ailu re to ex h au st p riso n re m ed ies w h er e in m ate’s g ri ev an ce fai l edt o “ al ert [] th e p ri so n t o th e n atu re o f th e w ro n g fo r w h i ch red ress [ w a s ] s o u g h t.” ) . F o le y ’s r e m a in in g c o n te n tio n s ar e u n p e r s u a s iv e . W e r e je c t F o le y ’s M ay1 2 , 2 0 1 0 , r e q u e s t to s tayth is ap p e a l. See M cKi nn ey v. Carey , 311 F . 3d 1198, 1200- 01 ( 9th C i r . 2002) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( pr i s one rm aynot s a tis f ye x h au s tio n r e q u ir e m e n t w h ile f e d e r a l a c tio n is p e n d in g , b u t d is m is s a l is w i tho utprej ud i ce t o ref i l i ng fe dera l ac t i on on ce exhaust i on re qu i re m enti s m et). A F F I R M E D .
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

SHAWN THOMAS, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF 

PROBATION AND PAROLE, 

 Respondent 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 459 MAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 10th day of November, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange
Act), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350), Michael M. Wick, M.D., Ph.D., the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Telik, Inc. (the Company), and Cynthia M.
Butitta, the Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his or her knowledge:



|1. | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the
Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 6th day of August, 2010.



|                                     |  |  |  |                                                    
|------------------------------------ |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|/S/ MICHAEL M. WICK                  |  |  |  | /S/ CYNTHIA M. BUTITTA                             
|Michael M. Wick, M.D., Ph.D.         |  |  |  | Cynthia M. Butitta                                 
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer

This
certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Telik, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### STATE of Missouri ex rel. Larry M. WOODS, Prosecuting Attorney of Boone County, Missouri, Relator, v. Walter D. RATLIFF, Notary Public within and for the County of Boone, State of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 47544.

Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc.

April 13, *1959.*

Larry M. Woods, Columbia, for relator.

Scott O. Wright, Columbia, Robert C. Smith, Raymond C. Lewis, Jr., Columbia, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

 In this proceeding relator seeks a preliminary writ of prohibition to prevent respondent Notary Public from swearing and taking the depositions of State’s witnesses, after the filing of felony complaints and before the holding of preliminary hearings. We agree with relator that our Rule 25.10, 42 V.A.M.S., permitting depositions “in any criminal case pending in any court” does not authorize the taking of depositions under these circumstances; a criminal case is not instituted or pending until an information is filed or an indictment returned. State v. Bithorn, Mo., 278 S.W. 685; State v. McNeal, 304 Mo. 119, 262 S.W. 1025. The issuance of a writ of prohibition is discretionary. Mansur v. Morris, Banc, 355 Mo. 424, 196 S.W.2d 287. We have determined that in this instance the ends of justice will best be served by declining to issue the writ. However, it is our view that the taking of depositions would be improper, and that the magistrate may proceed with the preliminary hearings.

Petition for preliminary writ of prohibition denied.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-40486

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Armando Serrato-Medrano, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:22-CR-282-1

______________________________

Before Smith, Southwick, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Armando 

Serrato-Medrano has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief per Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th 

Cir. 2011). Serrato-Medrano has not filed a response. 

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and relevant portions of the record. 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 10, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-40486 Document: 00516605419 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/10/2023
No. 22-40486

2

We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 22-40486 Document: 00516605419 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/10/2023
EX-10.4.(b)



 Exhibit 10.4(b) 

June 1, 2016 
 Willowbridge
Associates Inc. 
 101 Morgan Lane - Suite 180 

Plainsboro, N.J. 08536 

Attention: Mr. Steve R. Crane 
  

	 	Re:	 Management Agreement Renewals 



Dear Mr. Crane: 
 We are
writing with respect to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which reference is made below (the “Management Agreement”). We are extending the term of the Management Agreement through June 30, 2017 and all other
provisions of the Management Agreements will remain unchanged. 
  

	 	•	 	 Tactical Diversified Futures Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 CMF Willowbridge Master Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 Emerging CTA Portfolio LP 



 

	 	•	 	 Orion Futures Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 Managed Futures Premier Macro L.P. 



Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of
Mr. Patrick T. Egan at 522 Fifth Avenue – 7th Floor, New York, NY 10036 or fax to 866-428-9026. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 212-296-6808 or contact Jack Yuen at 212-296-1320. 

Very truly yours, 
  

			
	 CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Patrick T. Egan

		 	 Patrick T. Egan

		 	 President and Director

	
	WILLOWBRIDGE ASSOCIATES INC.
		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Steven R. Crane

		
	 Print Name:
	 	 Steven R. Crane

		
		 	 Willowbridge Associates Inc.


 PE/kg
* 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-50088

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAYMOND GILET CARPENTER, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-95-CR-289-1

- - - - - - - - - -

August 14, 1997

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Raymond Gilet Carpenter, Jr., appeals his sentence following

a guilty-plea conviction for making false and fraudulent

statements to a government agency and to the Commodity Credit

Corporation in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 15 U.S.C.

§ 714m(a). He bases his appeal on the grounds that the district

court erred in refusing to depart downwardly after he provided

substantial assistance to the Government and in refusing to
No. 97-50088

- 2 -

permit another judge to determine the appropriateness of a

downward departure.

The plea agreement Carpenter entered into with the

Government waived his right to appeal his sentence except as to a

sentence imposed outside the 21-to-27-month range. The sentence

he received, 22 months, fell within that range. We have reviewed

the record and conclude that the waiver was informed and

voluntary and is therefore binding on Carpenter. His appeal is

without arguable merit and thus frivolous. See Howard v. King,

707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is

frivolous, it is dismissed. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
| | SYMS CORP.
| | ----------



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 annual
report of Syms Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended February 25, 2012 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gary Binkoski, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting
Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|/s/ Gary Binkoski       | 
|----------------------- | 
|Gary Binkoski           | 
|Chief Financial Officer | 
|Syms Corp.              | 
|June 22, 2012           |
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

 

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT 

 

The Board of Directors 

Cytogen Corporation: 

 

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 33-30595, 33-52574, 33-57004, 33-63321, 333-00431, 333-04679, 333-27673, 333-48454, 333-58384, 333-59718, 333-75304 and 333-109986) on Form S-8 and the registrationstatements (Nos. 33-35140, 33-77396, 333-43809, 333-83215, 333-34550, 333-33436, 333-72226, 333-100315, 333-106797, 333-109344 and 333-110040) on Form S-3 of Cytogen Corporation of our report dated February 26, 2004, which report is based in part ona report of other auditors, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Cytogen Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensiveloss and cash flows for the years then ended, which report appears in the December 31, 2003 annual report on Form 10-K of Cytogen Corporation. 

 

Our report refers to our audit of the adjustments that were applied to restate the 2001 consolidated financial statements, as more fully described in Note1 to the consolidated financial statements. However, we were not engaged to audit, review, or apply any procedures to the 2001 consolidated financial statements other than with respect to such adjustments. 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

 

 

Princeton, NewJersey 

March 12, 2004
#### Ex parte Billy Burl CLAYTON.

No. 33836.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 15, 1961.

Paul W. Leech, Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Crim. Dist. Atty., Edward T. Miller, Jack Pevehouse, Phil Burleson, Asst. Dist. Attys., and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

Relator, his brother and his attorney appeared before the Honorable Glenn W. Byrd, Justice of the Peace of Dallas County, for the purpose of holding an examining trial concerning a charge of driving while intoxicated, second offense. During the course of that hearing, Judge Byrd held all three parties in contempt of court and assessed a punishment against each of them at one day’s confinement in jail and a fine of $25.

Relator and his brother made application to this Court for a writ of habeas corpus, and this Court ordered them produced before County Criminal Court No. 1 and that cause be shown why they were restrained of their liberty. A hearing was had before such court, who ordered relator remanded to custody, and he appeals. The record is before us, and from it we learn the following: That as they prepared to enter the examining court room, it was agreed between the three of them that relator’s brother should sit with relator’s attorney at the counsel table, that relator should sit in the court room in an effort to see “if we could get the officers to make a mis-identifi-cation.”

It was the testimony of the attorney representing the State at such hearing that the relator’s attorney “by pointing his finger and nodding his head” in answer to the court’s inquiry indicated that relator’s brother, seated next to him, was in fact relator. While it is true that relator’s attorney testified that he made no such motion and merely stated to the court that relator was present, the honorable court who held this hearing was the exclusive judge of the facts proven and credibility of the witnesses.

Relator testified that he was seated in the court room during the entire proceedings and could see and hear all that was transpiring.

As soon as the judge learned the true identity of the parties, he held them in contempt.

The only case which appears to be pertinent is Ex parte Bailey, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 582, 155 S.W.2d 927. A careful analysis of Judge Hawkins’ opinion therein is necessary for a proper disposition of the case at bar. In that case, the court held that an agreement to misrepresent one’s identity plus the act of doing so to the prosecutor out of the hearing of the court did not constitute contempt. We agree that the mere agreement *927to perform the act of subterfuge would not have constituted contempt, but we further hold that when relator saw and heard his attorney in answer to the court’s inquiry indicate his brother as being him and remained silent, then he became guilty of an act of contempt of the court.

Ex parte Bailey is here controlling, and the judgment is affirmed.
**UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105 - 2498

**MEMORANDUM** SUBJECT: Emi ssions Summary Files for Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards FROM: Margaret Zawacki

Assessment and Standards Division , Office of T ransportation and Air Quality Alison Ey

th and Alexis Zubrow Emissions Inventory

and Analy sis Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards TO: Docket EPA - HQ - OAR - 20 11 - 0 135 DATE: February 24 , 201 4 The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit emissions summary files for the inventories used in the air quality

mo deling for the Tier 3 motor vehicle emissions and fuel standards . The emissions modeling analyses are discussed in the Emissions Inventory for Air Quality

Modeling Technical Support Document : Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards . F ollowing is a brief description of the information contain ed i n the files. The files contain c ounty level delimited summaries for criteria pollutants and select hazardous air pollutants ( e.g. benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, acrolein, 1,3 - butadiene, ethanol , nap hthalene ) by

emissions modeling sector for the scenarios listed below. S ummaries are included by

month using average day emissions and separately with annual totals for the following scenarios: 200 7 baseline, 201 8 reference case , 201 8 control case , 2030 r eference case , and 2030 control case . T he files are named “tier3_county _sector _report_23sep2013 .xlsx” and “ tier3

_ onroad_

month_ report_20sep2013.xlsx ”. OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Thomas M. Dougherty, Chief Executive Officer of iPCS, Inc. (the "Company"),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period
    ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
    or 78o(d)); and

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

Dated:  August 14, 2002



                                           /s/ Thomas M. Dougherty
                                           -----------------------------
                                           Thomas M. Dougherty
                                           Chief Executive Officer
ACCEPTED

06-15-00030-CV

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

11/12/2015 3:07:32 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 11/12/2015 3:07:32 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
EXHIBIT 10.11


--------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
             BIKE & CYCLE TRAK USA, INC.                 Purchase Order #
              2116 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH                      030310-01
            MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55404            ----------------------------
                                                        Date: March 7, 2003
              TELEPHONE: 651-646-6886               ----------------------------
                 FAX: 612-874-9793                      Authorized by: JOW
--------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
Issued to: National Scientific Corporation                Ship via: n/a
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                        Ship to attn.: n/a
--------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
Telephone Number: (480) 948-8324                       Ship by (date): n/a

--------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
                  Description                                  Price
--------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
Design & Engineering Services                              $ 75,000.00
trakFORCE product, agreements pending
--------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Purchase order number must appear on all invoices and correspondence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signed:  /s/ John O. Williams
        ---------------------
        President                                       Date: March 7, 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CERTIFICATION OF
                          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
Burnam Management, Inc.for the quarter ending May 31, 2003, I, Rick Plotnikoff,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Burnman Management Inc.
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:

     1.   Such amended Quarterly Report of Form 10-QSB for the period ending May
          31, 2003, 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 such amended Quarterly Report on Form
          10-QSB for the period ended May 31, 2003, fairly represents in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of Burnam Management, Inc.

Dated:    February 25, 2004

Burnman Management, Inc.

By:  /s/ Rick Plotnikoff
-----------------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer