alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### NU MBE R 13- 08- 0056 4-C V 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I -E DI NBURG

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ H OM E- OWNE R S IN SU RAN C E C OM PA N Y , Ap pe l l an t, v . PAT R IC IA

WILD EY , Ap pe l l ee .

____ ____ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ On A ppea l from the C ounty C our t at L aw N o. 6 of H i da l go C ou nty , T exas .

____ ______ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ 

## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON B ef or e C hi ef

Just i ce Val dez and Just i ces Yañez and B enav i des M em or andu m O pi ni on P erC ur i am Appel lan t, Home- Ow ners I nsurance Compan y, pe rfe ct e d an ap p e a l f ro m a ju d gment entered by

the Co u n ty Co urt atLaw N o. 6 of Hi dal g o C ounty , Texas, i n c ause number CL- 07- 3797- F. The pa rt iesto thi s a ppeal have f ile d a j oin t not ic e of fili ng of nonsu iton groun ds tha t the parties ha v e reach ed a settle me nt regarding the m atte rs at issue in this2

appeal and in the u nder ly ing proceed ing
. The par ti es re q uestthatthi s C our t di smi ss the appeal
. The Co urt, hav ing co nsi dered the documents on file and the parti es’ join t moti on to dis mis s t he appe al, i s o f the opi nio n tha t t he moti on s houl d be g ra nted. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 4 2.1( a)
. The par

ti es’ j oin t moti on to di smi ss i s g ra nted, and the a ppeal i s h ereby DI SM ISSE D. I n ac cordance w it h the ag re ement of the par ti es, co stsare taxed ag ain st the par ty i ncurri ng sa me. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 4 2.1( d)
. Hav ing di smi ss ed th e appea l at t he par ti es’ req uest , no moti on for re hear ing w il l be ent ertai ned, and our mandate w il l is sue forthw it h.
PERC UR IAM Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv ered and filed thi s t he 12t h day

of Ma rc h, 20 09.
Agritek Holdings Inc.


777 Brickell Avenue Suite 500


Miami, Florida 33131


Re: Resignation of CEO B. Michael Friedman


 


 


September 16, 2021


 


Dear Board of Directors
and Shareholders:

I hereby tender my resignation as CEO of Agritek Holdings, Inc. effective as of September 17th 2021. My
resignation shall become effective upon the appointment of my successor. 


I will
be fully available to the business until my successor is up to date with the ongoing auditing process and provide counsel to the direction
the Company will move towards in the future.


My decision to resign from the Company’s
board of directors is not the result of any disagreement with the Company’s operations, policies or procedures.


I have appreciated the opportunity to serve
on the Company’s board and wish you and the Company the best as you continue to move forward with initiatives the company is pursuing.


Best regards,


 


B. Michael Friedman
Exhibit 32.2

Certification

of

Periodic Financial Report

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Terence P. Delaney, Interim Chief Financial Officer of Sunoco, Inc., certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Sunoco, Inc.



|                     |  |                                
|-------------------- |  | -------------------------------
|Date: August 6, 2009 |  | /s/ Terence P. Delaney         
|                     |  | Terence P. Delaney             
|                     |  | Interim Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Atli . REGION 10

A 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101-3140 .t. - MAY I 5 2015 

### Stu Clark Air Quality Program Manager Washington State Department of Ecology P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Re: Completeness Determination for the "Interstate Transport of Lead. Nitrogen Dioxide. and Ground-Level Ozone" SIP Submission Dear Mr. Clark: 

### This letter is in response to your May 1 I, 201, 5 submission "Interstate Transport of Lead, Nitrogen Dioxide, and Ground-Level Ozone." This submission is intended to demonstrate that the State of Washington meets the Clean Air Act (CAA) section t I 0(a)(2)(D)(i) 

### interstate transport requirements for the 2008 lead (Pb), 2008 ozone, and 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) national ambient air quality standards 

### (NAAQS) promulgated by the EPA. The EPA has determined that the submission is complete for these NAAQS. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (206) 553-1271 or have your staff contact Debra Suzuki, Air Planning Unit Manager. at (206) 553-0985 or Jeff Hunt, staff lead. at 206-553-0256. OFFICE OF AIR, WASTE AND TOXICS



## e Printed on Recycted Paper
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION




Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), Scott B. Paul, Chief Executive Officer of Hoku Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge, as follows:




The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended March 31, 2011, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Annual Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





INWITNESSWHEREOF, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of this 16th day of August, 2011.





By:

/s/ Scott B. PaulScott B. Paul

Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)




A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), has been provided to Hoku Corporation and will be retained by Hoku Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This certification accompanies the Form 10-K 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 Hoku Corporation 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-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Exhibit 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
            Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
                 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Drew A. Moyer, Principal Financial Officer of Technitrol, Inc., certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)   the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended October 1,
      2004 (the "Periodic Report") which this statement accompanies 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)   information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Technitrol, Inc.

Dated: November 3, 2004


                                                   /s/ Drew A. Moyer
                                                   ---------------------
                                                   Drew A. Moyer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Technitrol, Inc., and will be
retained by Technitrol, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q and shall not be considered as filed
as part of the Form 10-Q.
#### BARTON v. STATE.

No. 25684.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 30, 1952.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

The conviction is for unlawfully operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The punishment assessed is a fine of $50.00.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. Therefore, nothing is presented to this court for review.

The’judgment is affirmed.
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲

▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

05/30

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 30 May 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.92 N 77.01 W Meters AGL
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-161890) and the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-164741) of Xplore Technologies Corp. of our report dated June 24, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Xplore Technologies Corp. and subsidiary for the two year period ended March 31, 2011, which report appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Xplore Technologies Corp.

 

 

/s/ PMB Helin Donovan, LLP

 

Austin, TX

June 24, 2011

 

----
#### DINSMORE v. STATE.

No. 25308.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 16, 1951.

No attorney for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is theft; the punishment, two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

The record before us contains neither bills of exception nor a statement of facts. Nothing is presented for consideration.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
## IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-31,536-07

EX PARTE ROBERT ALAN FRATTA, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS A ND MOTION TO STAY THE EX ECUTION IN CAUSE NO. 1195044

IN THE 230 T H JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

HARRIS COUNTY Per curiam . O R D E R This is a subsequent application f or a writ of h abeas corpus f iled pursuant to the provisions of

Texas Code of

Crim inal Procedure Article 11.071 § 5 and a m otion to stay Applicant’s execution. 1 In June 2009, a jury

convicted Applicant of

the of f ense of capital m urder f or the death of his estranged wif

e. See T E X . P E N A L C O D E AN N . § 19.03(a). The jury a n swered

1 Unless otherwise indicated all references to Articles in this order refer to the Code of Criminal Procedure.F ratta - 2

the special issues subm itted under Article 37.071 and the trial court, accordingly , set Applicant’s punishm ent at death. This Court af

f irm ed Applicant’s conviction and sentence on direct appeal, denied habeas relief

on his initial Article 11.071 writ application, and dism issed his f irst and second subsequent Article 11.071 applications as abuses of the writ. Fratta v. State , No. AP-76,188 (Tex. Crim . App. Oct. 5, 2011) (not designated f or publication); Ex parte Fratta , No. W R-31,536-04 (Tex. Crim . App. Feb. 12, 2014) (not designated f or publication); Ex parte Fratta , No. W R -31,536-05 (Tex. Crim . App. June 30, 2021) (not designated f

or publication); Ex parte Fratta , No. W R-31,536-06 (Tex. Crim . App. May 25, 2022) (not designated f or publication). This Court received this, Applicant’s third subsequent Article 11.071 application f or a writ of

habeas corpus, on Decem ber 15, 2022. However, the pleading does not

com ply with the rules. Ef

f ective August 1, 2022, this Court am ended Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i) (length of docum ents) to lim it an Article 11.071 subsequent application to “37,500 words if com puter-generated, and 125 pages if not.” Applicant’s writ application is 251 pages long – m ore than double the allowed length. Theref ore, Applicant has until Decem ber 27, 2022, to f

ile an am ended application with the convicting court in a f orm that com plies with the rules or to show good cause to this Court why

he should be allowed to f i le a longer pleading. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 20 t hDAY OF DECEMBER, 2022.F ratta - 3

Do Not Publish
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1666

JAMES EDWARD MCCONNELL; KIM MCCONNELL,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

WATAUGA COUNTY; DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES WATAUGA 

COUNTY; THOMAS HUGHES; JENNIFER SMITH; JESSICA WINEBARGER; 

CHAD SLAGLE; LEN D. HAGAMAN; WATAUGA COUNTY SHERIFF’S 

DEPARTMENT; JASKA H. ROMINGER; WESTERN SURETY COMPANY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at 

Statesville. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (5:17-cv-00195-MOC-DCK)

Submitted: January 13, 2020 Decided: January 24, 2020

Before WILKINSON and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William E. Moore, Jr., GRAY, LAYTON, KERSH, SOLOMON, FURR & SMITH, PA, 

Gastonia, North Carolina, for Appellants. Bradley O. Wood, WOMBLE BOND 

DICKINSON (US) LLP, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James Edward McConnell and Kim McConnell appeal from the district court’s 

order granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants on their civil action asserting 

claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 and 1986 (2018), and related state-law claims arising 

from the arrest and prosecution of James McConnell on state criminal charges of which he 

was later acquitted. The McConnells also appeal the district court’s order affirming the 

magistrate judge’s order denying their motion to compel and granting one of the 

defendant’s motion for a protective order. We have reviewed the record included on 

appeal, as well as the parties’ briefs, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we 

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McConnell v. Watauga Cty., No. 5:17-

cv-00195-MOC-DCK (W.D.N.C. May 9, 2019; May 31, 2019). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 10.23

Base Salary Adjustments for Named Executive Officers

       As part of their annual review of executive base compensation, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors (the "Committee") of Elizabeth Arden, Inc. (the "Company") at a March 30, 2006 meeting, approved increases in the base salary paid by the Company to its named executive officers (defined in Regulation S-K Item 402(a)(3) and as set forth in the Company's Proxy Statement dated October 7, 2005 (the "Named Executives")) effective as of April 1, 2006, as follows: 

**Named Executive **Position **Prior******
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-0 8 -00 134 -CV CRLP Re se ar c h Bou le va r d, LL C , A ppe lla nt

v. Williamson County App raisal Districtand T ravis Centr al Appraisal District , Appellees F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF WI LLIAM SO N COUNTY , 368TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 06- 664- C368 , HO NORAB LE B URT CARNES , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

ME MO R

A ND UMO P I N I O N Ap pe lla nt, CR L P Re se arc h B ou le va rd , L L C, h a s f

ile d a n uno pp os e d mo tio n to dismiss this appeal. We grant the motion and dismiss the appea l. SeeTex. R. App. P . 42.1(a) (1).

__________________________________________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Pembe rton and Waldrop Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion Filed: June 12, 2008
CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Kerry K.W. Nagy, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Barnabus Enterprises Ltd.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;

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

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

|Date:  September 3, 2004 | /s/  Kerry K.W. NagyKerry K.W. Nagy 
Treasurer 
(Principal Financial Officer)
|------------------------ | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2768 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2768

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify that a duty of 
the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is to ensure that Internal Revenue 
  Service employees are familiar with and act in accord with certain 
                            taxpayer rights.

    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 ``Taxpayer Bill of Rights Act of 
2013''.

SEC. 2. DUTY TO ENSURE THAT IRS EMPLOYEES ARE FAMILIAR WITH AND ACT IN 
              ACCORD WITH CERTAIN TAXPAYER RIGHTS.

    Section 7803 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and by inserting after 
paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) Execution of duties in accord with taxpayer rights.--
        In discharging his duties, the Commissioner shall ensure that 
        employees of the Internal Revenue Service are familiar with and 
        act in accord with taxpayer rights as afforded by other 
        provisions of this title, including--
                    ``(A) the right to be informed,
                    ``(B) the right to be assisted,
                    ``(C) the right to be heard,
                    ``(D) the right to pay no more than the correct 
                amount of tax,
                    ``(E) the right of appeal,
                    ``(F) the right to certainty,
                    ``(G) the right to privacy,
                    ``(H) the right to confidentiality,
                    ``(I) the right to representation, and
                    ``(J) the right to a fair and just tax system.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 31, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2768

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify that a duty of 
the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is to ensure that Internal Revenue 
  Service employees are familiar with and act in accord with certain 
                            taxpayer rights.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6073

LARRY DONNELL GAITHER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

NORTH CAROLINA PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES, INCORPORATED; GERRY COLEMAN; J. PHILLIP GRIFFIN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-95-1032-5-H)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: June 4, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Donnell Gaither, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Gaither v. North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services, No. CA95-1032-5-H (E.D.N.C. Dec. 22, 1995). 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.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.B
 
 
 
  
 
 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 on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, of Southern Natural Gas Company (the “Company”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John R. Sult, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer certify (i) that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
     
 /s/ John R. SultJohn R. SultExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)Southern Natural Gas CompanyNovember 5, 2010
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Southern Natural Gas Company and will be retained by Southern Natural Gas Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.