alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
Case No. 6D2 3

- 853 Lower Tribunal No. 18

- CF

- 000186

_____________________________
K ATRINA M ARY D RAKES , Appellant
,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee

.

_____________________________ Appeal from the C ircuit Court for Lee County

. Margaret O. Steinbeck
, Judge.

M a r ch 5, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED

. STARGEL, WHITE and SMITH, JJ. , c oncur.

Howard L. “Rex” Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Steven L. Bolotin
, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cynthia Richards
, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa , for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FI LED
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The notes to the condensed  consolidated  financial  statements  are an integral
part of such statements and the condensed  consolidated financial information in
this schedule. Figures below are in thousands, except per-share data.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-27-1998             NOV-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-29-1998             MAY-29-1998
<CASH>                                          19,565                  19,565
<SECURITIES>                                    10,000                  10,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                   88,608                  88,608
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,324                   4,324
<INVENTORY>                                    100,468                 100,468
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               249,611                 249,611
<PP&E>                                          90,942                  90,942
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,355                  32,355
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 327,253                 327,253
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           69,720                  69,720
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        14,237                  14,237
<OTHER-SE>                                     236,792                 236,792
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   327,253                 327,253
<SALES>                                        143,176                 272,161
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               143,176                 272,161
<CGS>                                           91,543                 174,048
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   91,543                 174,048
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   389                     886
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 557                     943
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,101                  22,044
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,505                   8,047
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,596                  13,997
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,596                  13,997
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .20                     .30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20                     .29
        

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 32(i) CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section
1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Tricell, Inc. (the
Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that: (a) the Annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the Form 10-K) of the
Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934; and (b) the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Dated: June 9, 2005 /s/ Andre SaltAndre SaltChief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officer
 This certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent as shall be
expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.
#### James Sanford BUSHA v. STATE.

No. 25544.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 17, 1951.

No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

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

MORRISON, Judge.

The conviction is for operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The penalty assessed is a fine of $100.

Since perfecting his appeal, appellant has filed his personal affidavit advising that he does not desire to further prosecute the appeal.

The request is granted and the appeal is ordered dismissed.
#### Ex parte Floyd E. McWILLIAMS, Jr.

No. 27174.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 17, 1954.

. No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Ewing Werlein, Dist. Atty., King C. Haynie, Asst. Dist. Atty., Houston, Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

This is an extradition case.

Appellant sought his discharge by writ, of habeas corpus filed in Criminal District Court No. 3 pf Harris County, Texas-After a hearing, appellant was remanded-to the custody of the Sheriff of Harris County to be delivered to the agent of the State of Alabama, the demanding state,- and from said order he appeáls.

The sheriff’s return on the writ shows that appellant was being held by virtue of an executive warrant issued by the Governor, of the State of Texas to answer a charge in the State of Alabama.

No statement of facts or bills of exception accompany the record.

The trial court had before him the entire record and the evidence, and nothing is presented to authorize us to conclude that he abused his discretion in remanding appellant.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
Exhibit 10.4


 


THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS


 


OF


 


STEMTECH CORPORATION


 


The following is a true copy
of the resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors of this Corporation at a special meeting, notice to this meeting having been
waived, held on this 17th day of September, 2021;


 


The Board of Directors which was present for this
meeting & took active part therein was:


 


Charles Arnold


John Meyer


 


WHEREAS there has been presented
to and considered by this meeting a Motion to add an additional Director and Board Member pursuant to the Agreements executed this day
with Sharing Services Global Corporation.


 


NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the majority of Directors having considered this matter, and having opened the floor to all those who voice a preference in the issue,
and pursuant to NRS §78.315 have unanimously decided and RESOLVED:


 


JOHN “JT” THATCH
is hereby appointed as a full Director and Board Member of the Company.


 


Said Motion is hereby passed
and the corporate books, records and the Secretary shall file this Resolution in the corporate records


 


 


DATED: September 17th, 2021


 


 





_____________________________


David E. Price, Esq., Secretary, Corp Counsel
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00256-CV

IN RE STEVE MOSHER D/B/A 

MOSHER CONSTRUCTION 

COMPANY

RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

TRIAL COURT NO. 180,607-C

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus, the 

response filed by the real parties in interest, relator’s reply, and the reporter’s 

record and is of the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s

petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GABRIEL, and SUDDERTH, JJ.

DELIVERED: September 17, 2015

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8(d).
**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,
      Kenneth L. Johnson, Treasurer of St. Joseph, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of St. Joseph, Inc., for
      the
      fiscal year ended December 31, 2007, 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 that information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of St. Joseph, Inc.




Date:
      March 28, 2008





By:
            /s/
                Kenneth L. JohnsonName:
                Kenneth L. JohnsonTitle:
                Treasurer
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 62356]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26778]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties can 
review or obtain copies of agreements at the Washington, DC offices of 
the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Room 940. Interested 
parties may submit comments on an agreement to the Secretary, Federal 
Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within 10 days of the date 
this notice appears in the Federal Register.
    Agreement No.: 000086-019.
    Title: New York Shipping Association, Inc. and International 
Longshoremen's Association, AFL-CIO Assessment Agreement
    Parties: New York Shipping Association, Inc. International 
Longshoremen's Association.
    Synopsis: The agreement amendment amends pension base calculations 
and provides for the extension of the agreement through September 30, 
2004.

    Agreement No.: 010806-005.
    Title: Portland SSA Terminal 2 Marine Terminal Agreement.
    Parties: The Port of Portland, Stevedoring Services of America, 
Inc.
    Synopsis: The agreement amendment sets a management fee and a 
minimum annual guarantee and extends the agreement through September 
30, 2005.

    Agreement No.: 011699-001.
    Title: CMA CGM/Wan Hai Lines Ltd. Cooperation Agreement.
    Parties: CMA CGM, S.A., Wan Hai Lines Ltd.
    Synopsis: Under the proposed modification, some of the space CMA 
CGM provides Wan Hai lines in the transpacific trades will now come 
from the space that CMA CGM receives from Maersk Sealand under the 
Maersk Sealand/CMA CGM Pacific Slot Charter Agreement, FMC Agreement 
No. 011724. The parties request expedited review.

    Agreement No.: 200063-020.
    Title: New York Shipping Association, Inc. and International 
Longshoremen's Association, AFL-CIO Assessment Agreement.
    Parties: New York Shipping Association, Inc., International 
Longshoremen's Association.
    Synopsis: The agreement amendment amends pension base calculations 
and provides for the extension of the agreement through September 30, 
2004.


    Dated: October 13, 2000.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26778 Filed 10-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
Opinion issued July 1 6 , 201 9

In The 

## Court of Appeals
For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 1 9
- 00 437
- C V

——————————— IN RE 247 FREIGHT SERVICES , LLC AND ADEWALE OL UBUMMO , Rel ator s

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMOR ANDUM OPINION
Relator s , 247 Freight Services, LLC and Adewale Olubummo , ha ve filed a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking an order direct ing the trial court to reverse its order denying relators’ motion to strike intervention

. 1

1 The underlying case is 247 Freight Services, LLC and Adewale Olubummo v. A.H. United Carriers, Inc., Henry Go dwin and Adebayo Smith , cause number 2017

- 80440 , pending in the 125 th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Kyle Carter presiding

.2

We deny relator’s petitio n for writ of mandamus. See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Hightower

.
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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Tech
Laboratories, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, I, Donna Silverman,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Tech Laboratories, Inc.
hereby certifies 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30,
      2005, 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
      period ended September 30, 2005, fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tech
      Laboratories, Inc.

By:    /s/  Donna Silverman
       -------------------
       Donna Silverman
       Chief Executive Officer
       Chief Financial Officer, and
       Principal Accounting Officer
Dated: November 14, 2005
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5510 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5510

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain smooth nonwoven 
  fiberglass sheets of a type primarily used as acoustical facing for 
                            ceiling panels.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

 Mr. Stivers introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain smooth nonwoven 
  fiberglass sheets of a type primarily used as acoustical facing for 
                            ceiling panels.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN SMOOTH NONWOVEN FIBERGLASS SHEETS OF A TYPE 
              PRIMARILY USED AS ACOUSTICAL FACING FOR CEILING PANELS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.70.19 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain smooth nonwoven 
fiberglass sheets of a type primarily used as acoustical facing for 
ceiling panels) is amended by striking the date in the effective period 
column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### WALKER v. STATE.

No. 22458.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 31, 1943.

. E. T. Miller, of Amarillo, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

' The appeal' is from a sentence of five years in the penitentiary on a charge of murder.

Irene Walker and Ellean Bullocks, colored, and twin sisters, were jointly charged and tried for the murder of Clyda Mae Cook. Ellean Bullocks received a suspended sentence at a joint trial with appellant. The offense was alleged to have been committed on the 16th day of May, 1942. The evidence on behalf of the State is sharply in conflict in the minutest detail with that given by the defense. A girl companion of the deceased gave testimony at length covering the details of the homicide and involving the two sisters as principals in the crime. She and the deceased were walking on the streets of Amarillo at evening time in search of somebody who would ask them for a date. They had passed the home of the appellants sister and casually noticed both of them standing in front of the door near the sidewalk talking to a man. When a «.Aort distance away, the deceased screamed as she discovered the sisters approaching her, one with a gun and the other with a knife. .The deceased ran across the street screaming for her mother repeatedly while appellant followed her in close pursuit, shooting her in the back and inflicting two wounds, either of which, it is testified, might have been fatal. Ellean handed her knife to Irene and implored her to finish the job. As the .deceased lay on the ground mortally wounded, appellant approached her, grabbed her .by the hair and kicked her and then stabbed her in the heart with a knife. She also inflicted other wounds, indicating an effort to cut her throat, according to the State’s theory. The defense denied that Ellean had any connection with the .affair, thait she had a knife or took any part in it, and introduced evidence of self-defense¡for Irene, which seemed to have had but little .support by the physical, facts regardless :o£ the impression which it might have madp on the jury.

The only indication of a motive for. the crime is found in the mention of a previcjup conflict between the deceased and appellant •over a man with whom appellant had associated up until the time that she found hipi with the deceased -in a beer joint an,d •dancing place in the early part of May. An arrest followed this altercation but,..if$ connection with the final tragedy in. ¡the triangle is not sufficiently revealed to fonp any basis for discussion. Probably the jurors were able to vision something behind the scene supporting their conclusion that(a v-ery low penalty should be assessed .fop this brutal and wanton killing. .. ,

The record is before us without bills -o!f exception. ' There'is but -a 'brief, exception to the court’s charge which we conside'r óf little consequence. It will require no discussion. -The procedure appears -to berifi every way regular-. No brief has been presented indicating grounds for reversal. I

The judgment of the trial court is accordingly affirmed. ■ !
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 1:20-cv-00662 Document 2 Filed 06/25/20 Page 1 of 2

 Western District of Texas

Alex Proimos

1:20-cv-662

Thriveworks Solutions, LLC

Thriveworks Solutions, LLC- 9300 Research Blvd, Suite 320, Austin, Texas 78759

Richard Liebowitz, Liebowitz Law Firm, PLLC, 11 Sunrise Plaza, Suite 305, Valley 

Stream, NY 11580

Case 1:20-cv-00662-RP Document 2 Filed 06/25/20 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 1:20-cv-00662 Document 2 Filed 06/25/20 Page 2 of 2

1:20-cv-662 0

Case 1:20-cv-00662-RP Document 2 Filed 06/25/20 Page 2 of 2
October 28, 2020

William N. Woodson, III 

Minns Law Firm, P.C. 

4412 Spicewood Springs Rd., Suite 500 

Austin, Texas 78759-8583

 RE: Civil Case No. 5:20-cv-746-JKP

 Melody Joy Cantu, et al v. Dr.Sandra Guerra, et al 

Dear Counsel:

Our records indicate you are not admitted to practice in this Court. The Western District 

of Texas Local Court Rule AT-1(f)(1) states:

In General: An attorney who is licensed by the highest 

court of a state or another federal district court, but who 

is not admitted to practice before this court, may 

represent a party in this court pro hac vice only by 

permission of the judge presiding. Unless excused by 

the judge presiding, an attorney is ordinarily required to 

apply for admission to the bar of this court.

If you are representing a party, please submit a Motion requesting the Court's 

permission to appear in the above captioned case. If you wish to file an application to 

be admitted in the Western District of Texas, the application forms and the Local Rules 

for the Western District of Texas are available on our website www.txwd.uscourts.gov. 

If you are an attorney who maintains his or her office outside the Western District of 

Texas, the Judge may require you to designate local counsel. (Local Rule AT-2).

If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact our office.

Sincerely,

 JEANNETTE J. CLACK, CLERK

United States District Court

By:________________________________

 Monica Granados-Ramos

cc: all counsel

JEANNETTE J. CLACK

CLERK OF COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS PHILIP J. DEVLIN

727 East Cesar E. Chavez Blvd., Suite A500 CHIEF DEPUTY

San Antonio, Texas 78206

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 22 Filed 10/28/20 Page 1 of 1