alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC d/b/a §

BRAZOS LICENSING AND §

DEVELOPMENT § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-571[ADA]

§

v. §

§

GOOGLE LLC §

GOOGLE LLC’S NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE

Defendant Google LLC files this Notice of Appearance of Counsel and hereby notifies the 

Court that Michael E. Jones of the law firm Potter Minton, P.C., 110 N. College Ave., Suite 500, 

Tyler, Texas 75702 is appearing as counsel for Defendant. All pleadings, discovery, 

correspondence and other material should be served upon counsel at the address referenced above.

Dated: July 20, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

By /s/ Michael E. Jones

Michael E. Jones

SBN: 10929400

Patrick C. Clutter

SBN: 24036374

POTTER MINTON, PC

110 North College, Suite 500

Tyler, Texas 75702

Tel: 903-597-8311

Fax: 903-593-0846

mikejones@potterminton.com

patrickclutter@potterminton.com

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 

GOOGLE LLC

Case 6:20-cv-00571-ADA Document 11 Filed 07/20/20 Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on July 20, 2020, I electronically filed this document with 

the Clerk of Court via the Court’s CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to 

all counsel of record, all of whom have consented to electronic service in this action. 

/s/ Michael E. Jones

Case 6:20-cv-00571-ADA Document 11 Filed 07/20/20 Page 2 of 2
SERVED : JUL Y 1,201 1 U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C IN TH EMATTERO F DIAMON D AI RCHARTER , INC . FA A DOCKE T NO . CP10EA000 4 (Civi l Penalt y Action ) FDM S NO . FAA-2010-062 0 iRTMFN TO F ;yPORTATiO M : I OFERATiON S L - i P i : 2Lj

ORDE RO FCHIE FADMINISTRATIV ELA WJUDG E ADJOURNIN GPREHEARIN GCONFERENC ESIN EDI E I n it s "Reques t

for Postponemen t

o f Pre-Hearin g Conference " serve dJun e 30 , 2011 , Complainan t

state s that

Friday , Jul y 1 , 2011 , "woul db e aparticularl y inconvenien t da y for " th e Prehearin g Telephon e Conferenc e schedule dfo r tha t day becaus e Complainant' s Counse l mus t "atten dt o persona l matters. " Complainan t state s that

"th e partie s ar e continuin g t o discus s set tlement. " Accordingly , for

goo dcaus e shown , th e Prehearin g Telephon e Conferenc e i s adjourne d sin e die . S O ORDERED . pimie A . Yode r Chie f Administrative' . Attachmen t

- Servic e Lis t

I * -FA A Docke t No . CP10EA000 4 (Civi l Penalty Action ) SERVIC ELIS T ORIGINA L^Ol ^ COP Y Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 . , • , Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430,. . . ; Wilbu r Wrigh t Buildin g - Suit e iWlbOO ^

ONE^OP ^ Gregory S . Winton , Respondent' s Counse l Aviatio n Law Experts , LL C On e Researc hCourt , Suit e 45 0 V^CI A Rockville , M D 2085 0 TEL : 301-294-855 0 V FAX : 301-294-252 5 2^char y M . Herman , Complainant' s Counse l Attorney , Offic e of

th e Regiona l Counsel , AEA- 7 Easter n Regio n Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 1 Aviatio n Plaza , Roo m56 1 Jamaica , N Y 1143 4 TEL : 718-553-325 8 FAX : 718-995-569 9 - Th e Honorabl e Ronnie A . Yoder , Chie f Administrativ e Law Judg e U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Offic e o f Hearings , M-20 , Roo mE12-32 0 120 0 New Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-214 2 FAX : 202-366-753 6

' Servic e wa s b y U.S . Mail . Fo

r servic e i n perso n o r byciipedite

dcourier , use th e followin g address : Federa

l Aviatio n Administration, 60

0 Independenc

e Avenue, S.W„WHblt

f Wrigh t Buildin g - Suit e 2W1000 , Washington

, D C 20591 ; Attention : Hearin

g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430 . - 2 -
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER-SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                          FOR PERIOD ENDED
                                                                         SEPTEMBER 30, 1999
                                                                         ------------------
<S>                                                                     <C>
     Net earnings available to common ................................      $ 5,255,000
                                                                            ===========

     Average shares outstanding ......................................       12,261,397
Basic net earnings per-share .........................................      $      0.43
                                                                            ===========

     Average shares outstanding ......................................       12,261,397
     Stock options incremental shares ................................              791
                                                                            -----------
          Average shares outstanding, diluted ........................       12,262,188

Diluted net earnings per-share .......................................      $      0.43
                                                                            ===========

Diluted net earnings per-share assuming conversion of preferred stock:
     Net earnings available to common ................................      $ 5,255,000
     Preferred stock dividends for the period ........................      $   208,000
                                                                            -----------
     Net earnings before preferred stock dividends ...................      $ 5,463,000
                                                                            ===========
     Average shares outstanding ......................................       12,261,397
     Assumed conversion of preferred stock ...........................          260,000
     Stock options incremental shares ................................              791
                                                                            -----------
     Total ...........................................................       12,522,188
                                                                            ===========

     Per-share amount (anti-dilutive) ................................      $      0.44
                                                                            ===========
</TABLE>
#### W. B. FLOYD, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 23339.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 30, 1946.

Walter A. Nelson, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of burglary, and the jury also found that he had previously been convicted of felony theft. Punishment was assessed at 12 years in the penitentiary.

Upon the overruling of his motion for new trial appellant gave notice of appeal to this court. He has now filed his personal affidavit advising us that he does not desire to further prosecute his appeal, and at his request same is dismissed.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 2023

- 1342

_____________________________
D.M.H.
, Father o f C.D.H.
, Appellant,

v.

F LORIDA D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN AND F AMILIES , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County

. Steven C. Warrick , Judge

. February 28, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
B.L. T HOMAS , R AY , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 David J. Joffe
, Joffe Law, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Appellant.
Sarah J. Rumph, Children’s Legal Services, Tallahassee, for Appellee Department of Children and Families.

Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb and Catlin E. Burke, Tallahassee
, and Kristie L. Hatcher

- Bolin , Pro Bono, D efending Best Interests Project
, Lakeland , for Appellee Guardian ad Litem.
#### Sam SHORES, Appellant, v. STATE, Appellee.

No. 26917.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 3, 1954.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

Attempted burglary is the offense; the punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

Appellant has filed his affidavit stating his desire to have the appeal in this case dismissed.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
* 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-51064

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN ANTONIO CAMPOS-GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-97-CR-421-ALL

- - - - - - - - - -

April 8, 1998

Before JOLLY, JONES, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Antonio Campos-Gonzalez appeals his sentence for

reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Campos-Gonzalez argues that he was charged with and pleaded

guilty to simple reentry under § 1326(a) and that he could not be

sentenced under § 1326(b) because the indictment did not allege

that he had a prior aggravated felony conviction. His argument

is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in AlmendarezTorres v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 1998 WL 126904, at *3, *8

(U.S. Mar. 24, 1998).
No. 

-2-

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>
                               FIRST AMENDMENT TO
                 CHAMPIONSHIP AUTO RACING TEAMS, INC. EMPLOYMENT
            AGREEMENT WITH JOSEPH F. HEITZLER DATED DECEMBER 4, 2000
                          (the "Employment Agreement")


Amendment entered into this 4th day of December, 2001, by and between
Championship Auto Racing Teams, Inc. (CART) and Joseph F. Heitzler (Heitzler).

The Employment Agreement shall be amended as follows:

1. Heitzler shall remain as Chairman and CEO of CART until such time as a new
CEO and President is chosen by CART. Thereafter, Heitzler shall remain as
Chairman of the Board as provided hereinafter.

2. For each day hereafter that Heitzler remains as CEO of CART, a day shall be
added to the end of the Employment Agreement. As an example, if CART finds a CEO
and President four months after the date of this Amendment, the Employment
Agreement shall be extended for a four month period and Heitzler shall receive
compensation for such period at the rate in effect for the four months in which
he acted as CEO.

3. At such time as new CEO and President is hired by CART, Heitzler shall have
the option of continuing as Chairman of the Board, or terminating his
relationship with CART. In the event that Heitzler determines that he wishes to
remain with CART as Chairman, the Employment Agreement shall be honored in its
entirety. At any time after CART hires a new CEO and President, if Heitzler
determines that he wishes to sever his relationship with CART, the Employment
Agreement will be honored in its entirety and treated as if it were a
termination by CART without cause.

4. CART shall pay office expenses for Heitzler during the time he is affiliated
with CART either as Chairman and CEO or as Chairman in the amount of $1,300 per
month.

5. CART shall continue to provide Heitzler with a company car.


<PAGE>


The Employment Agreement is hereby ratified and affirmed in all respects except
as amended herein.

CART                                        Accepted and Agreed To:


-------------------------------------       ------------------------------------
Fred Tucker                                 Joseph F. Heitzler
Chairman, CART Compensation Committee



                                      -2-
AFS-09-015-E 

December 30, 2010 

 Exemption No. 8852B 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2005-20038 

Jerrod Seabaugh 

Director of Quality Control 

Era Helicopters, LLC 

600 Airport Service Road 

Lake Charles, LA 70605 

Dear Mr. Seabaugh: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8852. It 

explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated October 26, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Era Helicopters LLC (Era) for an extension of Exemption No. 8852. That exemption 

from §§ 91.411(b) and 91.413(c) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows Era to perform 

air traffic control (ATC) transponder tests and inspections and altimeter system and altimeter 

reporting equipment tests and inspections for its 14 CFR part 135 aircraft maintained under a 

continuous airworthiness maintenance program (CAMP). 

For clarification, the relief granted in Exemption No. 8852, which referenced Exemption No. 

8474A, includes Era aircraft maintained in accordance with the requirements of § 135.411(a)(1) 

under an Approved Aircraft Inspection Program (AAIP). 

In your petition, you indicate there has been no change in the conditions and reasons regarding 

public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 
 2

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in 

the Federal Register. The requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and 

any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Era. 

Our Decision 

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8852 

remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the 

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has 

delegated to me, I grant your petition. Please note the following conditions and limitations. 

Conditions and Limitations of your Exemption 

1. All ATC transponder tests and inspections and all altimeter reporting equipment tests 

 and inspections must be conducted under Era’s part 135 general Maintenance Manual. 

2. All tests and inspections must be recorded in the aircraft’s maintenance log by the 

person performing each inspection and test. This record must identify the person 

performing the inspection, the date of the inspection, and this exemption number. 

3. All records of these tests and inspections also must be kept in Era’s maintenance 

recording system for its aircraft operated under part 135. 

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8852 to December 31, 2013, unless 

sooner superseded or rescinded. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption 

No. 8852. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ John W. McGraw 

Acting Director, Flight Standards Service
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2894 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2894

  To discontinue eligibility of former Members of Congress and their 
  dependents for coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefit 
 Program (FEHBP) if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is 
                               repealed.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 31, 2013

  Mr. Ribble introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To discontinue eligibility of former Members of Congress and their 
  dependents for coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefit 
 Program (FEHBP) if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is 
                               repealed.

    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 ``No Health Care for Life for Congress 
Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. DISCONTINUING ELIGIBILITY OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND 
              THEIR DEPENDENTS FOR COVERAGE UNDER FEHBP IF PPACA IS 
              REPEALED.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the 
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148) is 
repealed, as of the first day of the first month beginning 30 days 
after the date of enactment of such repeal, any individual who is a 
former Member of Congress shall not be eligible to enroll or continue 
coverage for the former Member or the former Member's dependents in a 
health benefits plan under the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
Program under chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code.
    (b) Limitation.--Subsection (a) only applies to coverage derived by 
virtue of service as a former Member of Congress and does not apply to 
coverage under section 8905a of title 5, United States Code.
    (c) Former Member Defined.--In this section, the term ``former 
Member of Congress'' means an individual who--
            (1) who was a member of the Senate or House of 
        Representatives, a Delegate to the House of Representatives, or 
        the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico; and
            (2) who qualifies for coverage under chapter 89 of title 5, 
        United States Code, as an annuitant under section 8901(3)(A) of 
        such title immediately after retirement as such a member, 
        Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.
                                 <all>
```
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DANA WHITE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-2270

[October 18, 2018]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Edward Harold 

Merrigan, Judge; L.T. Case No. 09-21981 CF10A.

Dana White, Avon Park, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, KLINGENSMITH and KUNTZ, JJ., concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# AGENCY:

 Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

 Notice.

# SUMMARY:

 An open meeting of the Brooklyn District Citizen Advocacy Panel will be held in Uniondale, New York.

# DATES:

 The meeting will be held Thursday, March 2, 2000.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eileen Cain at 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3555.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an operational meeting of the Citizen Advocacy Panel will be held Thursday, March 2, 2000, 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. at the Long Island Marriott Hotel at 101 James Doolittle Boulevard 9, Uniondale, NY 11553. For more information or to confirm attendance, notification of intent to attend the meeting must be made with Eileen Cain. Mrs. Cain can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3555. The public is invited to make oral comments from 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 2, 2000. Individual comments will be limited to 5 minutes. If you would like to have the CAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3555, or write Eileen Cain, CAP Office, P.O. Box R, Brooklyn, NY 11202. The Agenda will include the following: introductions of the panel and open discussions with the public.

# Note:

Last minute changes to the agenda are possible and could prevent effective advance notice.

Dated: January 29, 2000.

John J. Mannion,

Program Manager, Taxpayer Advocate Service.

[FR Doc. 00-2734 Filed 2-7-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP   Document 25   Filed 11/13/20   Page 1 of 1
CERTIFICATION
OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTS







I,
Steven J. Cohen, Chief Executive Officer of Z Trim Holdings, Inc., an Illinois
corporation (the "Registrant"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
the Report on Form 10-K for the period of the Registrant from January 1, 2008
through December 31, 2008 (the "Report") which this statement accompanies fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and




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










Dated:  April
14, 2009


By                 /s/ Steven J.
Cohen


Steven J. Cohen


President and Director





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### CUTSINGER v. KING et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 19, 1951.

A. J. Deindoerfer, John P. Ryan, Louisville, for appellant.

Anton B. Dreidel, Louisville, for appel-lees.

■CAMMACK, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment denying Charles E. Cutsinger, a subcontractor, a mechanic’s lien against the property of the appellees. The appellees employed E. G. Ridge to build a house for them. Cut-singer was given a contract to install the sewer, water and gas connections and other plumbing at a contract price of $1100. Ridge was denied a materialman’s lien because it was found that a balance owing to him was more than offset by damages suffered by the Kings as the result of his defective workmanship. In January, 1948, Cutsinger filed a lien against the Kings when it developed that there was a controversy between them and Ridge. He did not give the 35 days’ written notice required under KRS 376.010(3). The effect of Cut-singer’s testimony at that time was that he had completed the work covered by his $1100 contract. In March, 1949, Mrs. King called Cutsinger to her home. At that time he repaired some faucets, tested some insulation equipment tying into a public utilities service, fixed a leak on the house line and a thermostat on a water heater. The amount of his charge for services at that time was $17. He demanded that the Kings pay him $1117, which covered the original contract price of the work he had done and *609the $17 charge for the incidental work. In April, he filed another lien for $1117. The testimony was heard before a commissioner and he allowed Cutsinger a lien for only $17.

 It is the general rule in this State that time for filing a mechanic’s lien can not be extended where the subcontractor only makes repairs and does trivial work. Henry Koehler & Co. v. Hines, 185 Ky. 270, 214 S.W. 906. As pointed out above, Cut-singer had already filed a lien, though too late, asserting the full amount of his $1100 contract price. In support of that lien he testified in effect that he had completed his work. At the second hearing he sought to distinguish his testimony on the first hearing by saying that he meant that he had completed his work, as far as he could go at that time. Nevertheless he was asking for the full contract price of his work. As pointed out by the commissioner, Cutsinger’s obligations under his original contract' had been performed to the satisfaction of the Kings, and his obligation to them had stopped. Furthermore, it is quite obvious that the nature of the work done by Cut-singer in March, 1949, comes under the category of incidental repairs.

Judgment affirmed.