alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 30, 2018 a0523

Order 

Clerk

May 30, 2018

156308

JOJUAN DYSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 156308

COA: 331256

Wayne CC: 15-001136-NI

CITY OF DETROIT,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

GREGORY COTTON, Defendant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 18, 2017 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### NAMI v. INDUSTRIAL MFG. CO.

Nos. 16070, 16077.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Oct. 5, 1949.

Herman G. Nami, San . Antonio,. Joe Burkett, San Antonio, for appellant.

House, Mercer & Kaine, San Antonio, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

On September 22, 1949, the appellant filed a motion (No. 16077) for leave to file the transcript in this cause. It appears that judgment was rendered on May 24, 1949, and a motion for new trial was overruled on June 30, 1949. A notice of appeal was contained in the order overruling the motion for new trial.

More than seventy-five days elapsed 'between the overruling of the motion for new trial and the filing of the motion in this Court requesting leave to file the transcript.

If a motion for extension of time be filed within fifteen days after the sixty day period prescribed by Rule 386, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, for filing the transcript and statement of facts, a Court of Civil Appeals is authorized to grant an extension upon good cause shown. If, however, no motion be filed within said fifteen-day period (seventy-five days from the rendition of judgment or order overruling motion for new trial), the matter is no longer discretionary with the Court, but it is wholly,without authority to permit the filing of the transcript. Rule 386 is mandatory and appellant must comply with its provisions in filing the transcript and statement of facts.

As appellant’s motion was not filed within the time prescribed by the rule, it must be overruled. Garrett v. Mercantile National Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 170 S.W.2d 238, affirmed, 140 Tex. 394, 168 S.W.2d 636, 638; Walker v. Cleere, 141 Tex. 550, 174 S.W.2d 956; State ex rel. Crawford *654v. Wagner, Tex.Civ.App., 203 S.W.2d 795, wr. ref.; Alexander Motor Co. v. Pruitt, Tex.Civ.App., 198 S.W.2d 947, wr. ref.; Greer v. Poulter, Tex.Civ.App., 189 S.W.2d 883; Byrnes v. Blair, Tex.Civ.App., 183 S.W.2d 287, mand. denied.

Appellee has filed a proper motion (No. 16070) to affirm on certificate, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 387, T. R.C.P. From what has been said, it' follows that this motion should be granted,, and it is so ordered.

Appellee’s motion No. 16070 is granted. Appellant’s motion No. 16077 is overruled.

SMITH, C. J., absent.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 97-60435 Summary Calendar

__________________ KHAN AHMED ARIF, Petitioner, versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

- - - - - - - - - - - - Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A91 541 399

- - - - - - - - - - - - September 30, 1998 Before DAVIS, DUHE’, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Khan Amed Arif seeks to appeal the denial by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) of his motion to reconsider its October 22, 1996, decision and of his motion to reopen deportation proceedings. Arif asserts that the BIA failed to consider all of the evidence which he presented at the deportation proceedings and that there is new evidence warranting the reopening of the proceedings.No. 97-60435 -2- After reviewing the record before us, we conclude that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying both motions. See Ogbemudia v. I.N.S. , 988 F.2d 595, 600 (5th Cir. 1993); Ghassan v. INS , 972 F.2d 631, 638 (5th Cir. 1992). The petition for review is DENIED.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

May 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133234 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

TIMOTHY A. GROSSKLAUS,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 133234 

 COA: 263376 

Wayne CC: 98-816343-DM

SUSAN R. GROSSKLAUS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 21, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0521 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

May 30, 2007 

 Clerk
#### AUSTIN v. STATE.

No. 25610.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 9, 1952.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for possession of marijuana, a narcotic drug, with punishment assessed at 5 years in the penitentiary.

A search made under a warrant obtained for the purpose of searching appellant’s home for marijuana, resulted in the finding of a substance in appellant’s purse which the officer believed to be marijuana. She was arrested as authorized by the warrant and taken to the police station where a search of her person resulted in the finding of ten marijuana cigarettes fastened under her blouse with adhesive tape.

Appellant did not testify and offered no testimony in her behalf.

The evidence appears to have been lawfully obtained and sustains the conviction. No other question is raised on the appeal.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
#### Harold Thomas FALLWELL, Appellant, v. STATE, Appellee.

No. 25319.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 9, 1951.

No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for rape, with punishment assessed at eight years in the penitentiary.

Appellant has filed in this court his affidavit advising that he desires that his appeal be dismissed.

Appellant’s motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
{"agency":"Treasury","generated":"2019-01-31 16:18:09","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"},{"label":"2014","value":"2014"},{"label":"2015","value":"2015"},{"label":"2016","value":"2016"},{"label":"2017","value":"2017"},{"label":"2018","value":"2018"}],"value":"2019"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Reporting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q1"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"10"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":null}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["BEP","DO","FinCEN","Fiscal Service","IRS","MINT","OCC","TIGTA","TTB"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["11","273","47","82","1904","31","394","61","28"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["11","324","49","77","1865","23","428","58","20"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":["13","1001","21","26","380","2","50"," ","3"]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2019","quarter":"Q1"}
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5
                                                    
<S>                                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                                  58,322,853
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           19,278,632
<ALLOWANCES>                                             2,984,800
<INVENTORY>                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        78,024,040
<PP&E>                                                   5,622,477
<DEPRECIATION>                                           2,713,273
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         207,035,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   92,393,725
<BONDS>                                                 35,800,442
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                 1,000,000
<OTHER-SE>                                              77,841,333
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           207,035,500
<SALES>                                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        91,980,525
<CGS>                                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           77,196,857
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        16,378,317
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                         624,749
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         (2,219,398)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            (1,329,713)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       (889,685)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                              (889,685)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

      ( print page 66567)    
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 Civil and Mechanical Systems (1205).                    

*Date/Time:*                         December 7-8, 2000; 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Room 850, Arlington, VA.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Closed.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dr. Joy Pauschke, Program Director, network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, Division of Civil and Mechanical Systems, National Science Foundation, Room 545, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-8360.                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice and recommendations concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate nominations for the FY'01 Mechanics and Structures of Materials and Surface Engineering and Material Design Review 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: October 31, 2000.

Karen J. York,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-28401  Filed 11-3-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-0050

_____________________________

DAVID E. ZIPPERER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Russell Healey, Judge.

June 26, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, ROWE, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Refik W. Eler of Elerlaw, LLC, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Virginia Chester Harris, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
APPENDIX D-2

2011 Onroad Source Ozone Season Inventory

Provided in Electronic Form Only

Bureau of Air Quality

Department of Environmental Protection
[This page intentionally left blank.]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCKDIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

NO. 5:22-CR-O41-04-H

ODDESSY BLACKMORE,

Defendant.

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF TIIE I,JMTED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry

of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent of the Defendant, and the Report and Recommendation

Conceming Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto

having been filed within fourteen (14) days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

$ 636OX1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge conceming the Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is

hereby accepted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty and

Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty.

Sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Court's scheduling order'

SO ORDERED.

Dated November 1+ 2022.

JAMES SLEY HE RIX

UNITE STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:22-cr-00041-H-BQ Document 179 Filed 11/17/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 509
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MICHAEL CHEATOM,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 84 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 30th day of August, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
#### ADAIR v. STATE.

No. 25792.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 23, 1952.

Reid & Reid, by J. W. Reid, Abilene, for appellant.

*893George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin; for the State.

On State’s Motion to Dismiss.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was assessed a fine of $2,000 with two years in jail on a complaint charging the possession of beer for sale in a dry area, together with a prior conviction for the purpose of enhancing the punishment.

This court delivered its opinion on April 2, 1952, reversing the judgment and remanding the cause to the trial court for a new trial.

By proper affidavit it is now made known that prior to the date of the foregoing opinion and on the night of the 24th of March, 1952, the appellant escaped from the jail of Taylor County and had not been apprehended on the 31st day of March, 1952, when said affidavit was presented to this court.

The opinion reversing the judgment is withdrawn and it'is the order of this court that the appeal be dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
 
 The undersigned, Ronald Michels, President and Chief Executive Officer of ANADIGICS, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 2, 2011 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 such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Dated: May 10, 2011
 By:
/s/ Ronald MichelsRonald MichelsPresident and Chief Executive Officer
 
 This certification shall not be deemed to be “filed” for the purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated by reference.
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to ANADIGICS, Inc. and will be retained by ANADIGICS, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
AVS

Quality Management

System

Title: Domestic New Action Worksheet with No S8

QPM#

AIR-ANM-D30..f6

Date: December 17, 2008

Revision

1

Page 4 of 5

Record of Contacts

20 I0 - OOLj 2-

FOMS Docket No. FAA..:tt& _

With \vhom outside the FA..o\ has tJjis proposal been discussed (e.g., ATA, RAA, ALPA., etc.)?

Organization Person CQntacted Date

ATA atafQ}airiines.org to the attention of May 19,2008

Mr. Fuse-us

UNCONTROLLED COPY WHEN DOWNLOADED

Checll the Masier List to Verify ThaI This. is the Correct RevlstOn Before Use
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 123

Encouraging United States businesses to adopt a voluntary code for applying

internationally recognized human rights principles when engaging in commerce in the People’s Republic of China.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 15, 1993

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts submitted the following concurrent resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Encouraging United States businesses to adopt a voluntary

code for applying internationally recognized human rights

principles when engaging in commerce in the People’s

Republic of China.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the

3 President should direct the Secretary of Commerce to con4 sult with American business leaders, having significant

5 trade with or investments in the People’s Republic of

6 China, to encourage them to adopt a voluntary code of

7 conduct that—
2

•HCON 123 IH

1 (1) follows internationally recognized human

2 rights principles;

3 (2) ensures that the employment of Chinese

4 citizens is not discriminatory in terms of sex, ethnic

5 origin, or political belief;

6 (3) refrains from knowingly using prison labor;

7 (4) recognizes workers’ right to organize and

8 bargain collectively; and

9 (5) discourages mandatory political indoctrina10 tion on business sites.

Æ
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
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 March 8, 2011

d0228 

# Order

March 8, 2011

142029

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142029 COA: 293151 Jackson CC: 08-005181-FC TIMOTHY DANIEL FINLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 21, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 289

AMENDMENTS
In the Senate of the United States,

August 25 (legislative day, August 18), 1994.

Resolved, That the resolution from the House of Representatives (H. Con. Res. 289) entitled ‘‘Concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment or recess of the two

Houses’’ do pass with the following

AMENDMENTS:

1 Ω1æPage 1, lines 4 and 5, strike out øThursday, Septem2 ber 8¿ and insert: Monday, September 12

3 Ω2æPage 1, line 13, strike out øThursday, September 8,

4 1994¿ and insert: Monday, September 12, 1994, or at such

5 time as may be specified by the Majority Leader or his des6 ignee in his motion to recess or adjourn

Attest:

Secretary.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JAMES JUNIOR WEST, §

 §

Plaintiff, §

 §

v. § Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00270-O-BP

 §

GRETCH COLBERT, §

 §

Defendant. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and a 

Recommendation in this case. No objections were filed, and the Magistrate Judge’s

Recommendation is ripe for review. The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, 

Conclusions, and Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District 

Judge believes that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and 

they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED on this 6th day of June, 2022. 

Case 4:22-cv-00270-O Document 8 Filed 06/06/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 31