alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## NO. 12

- 15

- 00113

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

JASON ROWELL, APPELLANT

V.

FIRETROL PROTECTION SYSTEMS, APPELLEE §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 114T H

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM
This appeal is being dismissed because Appellant has failed, after notice, to pay or make arrangements to pay the trial court clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record. The trial court’s
judgment was signed on April 16, 2015 , and Ap pellant timely filed a notice of appeal. The

clerk’s record was due on May 11, 2015 . On May 12, 2015 , this court notified Appellant that

, according to the trial court clerk

, he had not requested the clerk’s record or made arrangements
to pay for its prep aration. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 35.3(a)(2). Appellant was warned, pursuant to rule
of appellate procedure 42.3, that the appeal would be dismissed unless proof of full payment to
the clerk was provided on or before May 22, 2015

. The deadline has now passed, and Appellant has neither provided proof of full payment nor otherwise responded to this court’s notice. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(c).
Opinion delivered June 3, 2015

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

( PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JUNE 3, 2015

NO. 12

- 15

- 00113

- CV

JASON ROWELL, Appellant V. FIRETROL PROTECTION SYSTEMS,

Appellee

A ppeal from the 114th District Court
of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 15

- 0581

- B)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same
being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDE RED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that
this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed ; and that this decision be certified to the court

below for observance.
By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S

N O . A P
- 7 6 , 7 1 4

E X P A R T E T H O M A S L O U I S V A N H O O K , A p p l i c a n t

O N A P P L I C A T I O N F O R A W R I T O F H A B E A S C O R P U S C A U S E N O . 1 0 , 7 4 3 I N T H E J U D I C I A L D I S T R I C T C O U R T 1
- A

F R O M J A S P E R C O U N T Y

P e r c u r i a m . O P I N I O N
P u rsuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Proced u re , t h e cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte
Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of failure to reg ister

as a se x offe nder a

nd sentenc ed to forty

y ear s’ imprisonment. Applicant contends that his counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance b ec au s e he failed to timely file a notice of appea l. We rema nded this application to the trial court for finding s of fac t and conclusions of law

. The trial court has deter

mined that trial counsel did not timely fi le a notice of appea l. We2

find that Applicant is entit l ed t o t h e o p p ortunity to file an out-of-time appea l of the judgme nt of conviction in Cause No. 10,743 f rom the Judi cial District C ourt 1-A of J asper County . Applicant is order ed returne d to that time at which he may g ive a written notice of appea l so that he may then, with the aid of counsel, obtain a meaning ful appea l. Wit hin ten day s of the issuance of this opinion, the trial court shall deter

mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall immediately appoint an attorney to repr esent Applicant on direc t appea l. All time limit s shall be calc ulated as if the sentenc e had been imposed

o n t h e d at e on which the mandate of this Court issues. We hold that, should Applicant desire t o
prosec ute an appea l, he must take aff irmative steps to file a written notice of appea l in the trial court within 30 day s after

the mandate of this Court issues.

Deliver ed: J anuar

y 11, 2012 Do Not Publish
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**HALEEM POOLE,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 279 EAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 7th day of October, 2015, the Petition for All owance of Appeal is** 

DENIED

**.**
Exhibit 32.1

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

I, James M. Papada, III, Chief Executive 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 six months ended June 25, 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: July 30, 2004


                                                    /s/ James M. Papada, III
                                                    ------------------------
                                                    James M. Papada, III

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.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6242]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2744]



[[Page 6242]]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Advanced Networking and Infrastructure 
Research; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Advanced Networking and 
Infrastructure Research (#1207).
    Date/Time: March 2 and 3, 2000; 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Place: Room 1120, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Persons: Darleen Fisher and Karen Sollins, Division of 
Advanced Networking Infrastructure Research, Room 1175, National 
Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. 
Telephone: (703) 306-1950.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
     Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals submitted to the 
Networking Research Program as part of the selection process for 
awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: February 1, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-2744 Filed 2-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 210 (Monday, October 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 64696]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27777]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER00-2962-000 and ER00-2962-003]


West Georgia Generating Company L.P.; Notice of Filing

October 25, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 18, 2000, West Georgia Generating 
Company, L.P. (West Georgia), an Exempt Wholesale Generator that owns 
and operates a 640 MW electric generation plant in Thomastown, Georgia, 
tendered for filing a Negotiated Contract for the Purchase of Firm 
Capacity and Energy between West Georgia Generating Company L.P., and 
Gulf Power Company (the Agreement). The purpose of the filing was to 
provide corrected designations under Order No. 614, FERC Stats. and 
Regs. para. 31,096 (2000), as required by the letter order issued in 
these dockets on September 21, 2000.
    West Georgia requests that the Agreement be permitted to become 
effective June 1, 2000.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
and protests should be filed on or November 8, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http:///www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance). Beginning November 1, 2000, comments and protests 
may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web 
site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-27777 Filed 10-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 *



In
connection with the annual report of Vicuron Pharmaceuticals Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Dov A. Goldstein, M.D., Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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), as applicable, 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |                                                    
|-------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 14, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ DOV A. GOLDSTEIN, M.D.                         
|                     |  |  |  | Dov A. Goldstein, M.D.                             
|                     |  |  |  | Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer



This certification
accompanies this annual report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

---

|* | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Vicuron Pharmaceuticals Inc. and will be retained by Vicuron Pharmaceuticals Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.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, 2002, of Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (the "Company") as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Greg G. Gruber, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer, 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/ Greg G. Gruber
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Greg G. Gruber
                                              Senior Vice President, Chief
                                              Financial Officer and Treasurer
                                              (Principal Financial Officer)

                                              November 13, 2002
**Exhibit 31.02****CERTIFICATIONS****I, Brian R. Day, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:**1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Viseon, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986];(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter(the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the smallbusiness issuer’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 asignificant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: February 10, 2006
**Exhibit 32**

**WASHINGTON FEDERAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES**

**SECTION906 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

**WASHINGTON FEDERAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES**

**CERTIFICATION**

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Washington Federal, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the undersigned’s best knowledge and belief:

(a) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended; and 

(b) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company. 

Dated this 27th day of January 2010. 

 
Washington Federal, Inc.(Company)
/s/ Roy M. Whitehead
ROY M. WHITEHEADChairman, President andChief Executive Officer
/s/ Brent J. Beardall
BRENT J. BEARDALLExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
#### Ex parte ZORN.

No. 23430.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 5, 1946.

Nat Gentry, Jr., and J. Byron Saunders, both of Tyler, for appellant.

John Y. Lawhon, Co. Atty., of Tyler, and Ernest S. Geons, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State. ,

GRAVES, Judge.

Relator was indicted by a grand jury ■of Smith County for the rape of a woman by force, threats and fraud. Upon the trial of a habeas corpus matter before the district judge he was remanded to jail without bail to await trial on such indictment.

The testimony of the injured party, a girl fifteen years old, was gone into at length before the trial judge, no witnesses being offered by the relator.

The proof herein is evident that a ravishment by an assault and force of this girl’s body took place, and the only question left for our determination is whether it appears that the accused would probably be punished capitally if the law is administered. See 5 Tex.Jur., p. 818, and cases cited under Notell.

Unquestionably the facts produced herein by the State evidence a case of rape by force, supplemented by the circumstance of relator’s flight into another State, and which, in the opinion of the trial court, led him to conclude, under the testimony here presented, that the calm and dispassionate judgment of a jury would probably render a verdict of death. From the facts we do not feel disposed to hold that such court abused his discretion in thus holding.

The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 25, 2010

0517 

# Order

May 25, 2010

140503 & (42)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140503 COA: 286086 Saginaw CC: 07-028528-FC HENRY LOUIS CARR, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the December 15, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to
remand is DENIED.
#### LICATA v. CAPPADONA.

No. 11280.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Galveston.

Nov. 13, 1941.

Vincent Licata and L. R. Patton, both of Galveston, for appellant.

No brief filed for appellee.

MONTEITH, Chief Justice.

On April 7, 1932, appellee, Joe Cappa-dona, obtained a judgment against Ed Licata in the county court of Galveston County upon a note for the sum of $500, bearing date June 6, 1929, payable to the order of appellee. On March 26, 1941, appellant, Ed Licata, filed a motion in the county court of Galveston County alleging that said judgment was void for the reason that appellee in his original petition upon which said judgment was based alleged that appellant, Ed Licata, and his wife, Bernada Licata, were jointly liable to appellee and that judgment was rendered against appellant alone.

On motion of appellee the court sustained his general demurrer and special plea-of the four years’ statute of limitation to appellant’s motion. Appellant appeals from the action of the court in sustaining said pleas.

It is now the established law in this state that the four-year statute of limitation, Article 5529, Revised Statutes, which was properly invoked by appellee, interposes an insuperable obstacle to appellant’s maintenance of a direct motion to vacate the judgment rendered against him on April 7, 1932. Levy v. Roper et al., 113 Tex. 356, 256 S.W. 251; Smith et al. v. Lightfoot et al., Tex. Civ.App., 143 S.W.2d 151.

*192It is undisputed that appellant had personal knowledge of the filing of appellee’s suit and of the rendition of said judgment. No attempt is made to excuse the delay in filing said motion to set aside such judgment and no grounds 'for equitable relief are set up which would authorize' this court to find that the four-year statute of limitation was inapplicable.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment of the trial court will be in all things affirmed.

Affirmed.