alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Buddy Garcia, Chairman 

Larry R. Soward, Commissioner 

Bryan CZl. Shaw, Ph.D., Commissioner 

Glenn Shankle, Executive Director 

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

Proteci~ng Texas by Reduc~ng andPreuentmng Pollutzon 

March 11,2008 

Richard E. Greene, Regional Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 6 

1445 Ross Avenue. 

Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 

Re: Submission of Section 110(a) State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for the 1997 Eight-Hour 

Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter (PM2J National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

Dear Mayor Greene: 

In late December 2007, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) received the 

letter from Stephen Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), regarding the submission of section 110(a) SIPs for 

the 1997 eight-hour ozone and PM25 NAAQS. In this letter, the EPA informed the State of 

Texas of the extension of the deadline for the EPA to make findings of failure to submit 11 0(a) 

SIPS for these respective standards. 

TCEQ staff is currently in the process of reviewing the Texas SIP in order to supplement its 

December 12, 2007, submission for ozone and make its PM23 submission concerning 

"infrastructure elements" in accordance with EPA's "Guidance for SIP Submissions to Meet 

Current Outstanding Obligations Under Section 1 lO(a)(2)(D)(i) for Eight-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 

NAAQS" and Section 110(a)(2) of the Federal Clean Air Act. The TCEQ will provide this 

additional information as soon as practicable. If you have any additional comments, please 

contact David C. Schanbacher, Chief Engineer, at 5121239-1228. 

Sincerely, 

cc: Carl Edlund, EPA Region VI 

Tom Diggs, EPA Region VI 

Guy Donaldson, EPA Region V 

P.O. Box 13087 a Austin, Texas 78711-3087 512-239-1000 * Internet address: ww~r.tceq.state.tx.us 

rbrint,.<l u,: ~~cycl~d.~,~~~~: umg s,~-l~;md nk
u.s DISitict coitil

NORlli;:lL\ Dts.. :i lt'1 or:'i'i:}:.\s

IN THE TJNITED STATES DISTRICT !--*-----*-..-

Fii f "D

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF T JUL I 8 2023 DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

EDUARDO JAIR SALVADOR (1),

Case Number: 3 :22-CR-001 75-M

Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

EDUARDO JAIR SALVADOR (l), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir.

1997), has appeared before me pursuant to Fed. R. Crim.P. I l, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count I of the Indictment.

After cautioning and examining EDUARDO JAIR SALVADOR (l) under oath conceming each of the subjects mentioned

in Rule 1 l, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense(s) charged is supported

by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore recommend that the

plea of guilty be accepted, and that EDUARDO JAIR SALVADOR (l) be adjudged guilty of 8 U.S.C. $ 1326(a)rlllegal

Reentry After Removal from the United Statesrand have sentence imposed accordingly. After being found guilty of the

offensg.by the district judge,

{ The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

n The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to l8 U.S.C. $ 3la3(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community

if released.

The Government does not oppose release.

The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under $ 3142(b) or (c).

The Government opposes release.

The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the

Government.

The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to l8 U.S.C. $ 3la3(a)(2) unless (l)(a) the Court finds there is a

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circu are clearly shown

under pvincing evidence $ 3 I 45(c) why the defendant should npt be detai (2) the

that the defendant is not likely to flee or

Date:July 18,2023.

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. $636(bXlXB).

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

!

tr

tr

n

n

!

u

finds by clear

or the commun

Case 3:22-cr-00175-M Document 23 Filed 07/18/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 39
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. §1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of EndocardialSolutions, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, James W. Bullock, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

 

| /s/ James W.  Bullock                  |
|----------------------------------------|
| James W. Bullock                       |
| President and  Chief Executive Officer |
| November 14,  2002                     |

 

----
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 01795

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name3

Description

x 01795\01795_Checklist.XLS EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

01795\01795_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

x 01795\01795_Part A.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 01795\01795_Part B.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 01795\01795_Part C.XLS Plant submitted survey file

x 01795\01795_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 01795\01795_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

01795\Certification Statement Plant ID_01795.pdf Plant certification statement

x 01795\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION\01795_Calc Sheet.doc ERG Technical Reviewer Notes

x 01795\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION\01795_Map.BMP Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

01795\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION\01795_WaterBalance.BMP Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 

3

 No hardcopy log is included for this plant as no hardcopy materials were received.
# QSBL 063020

# QSBL 033120

# QSBL 123119

# QSBL 093019

# QSBL 063019

# QSBL 033119

# QSBL 123118

# QSBL 093018

# QSBL 063018

# QSBL 033118

# QSBL 123117

# QSBL 093017

# QSBL 063017

# QSBL 033117

# QSBL 123116

# QSBL 093016

# QSBL 063016

# QSBL 033116

# QSBL 123115

# QSBL 093015

# QSBL 063015

# QSBL 033115

# QSBL 123114

# QSBL 093014

# QSBL 063014

# QSBL 033114

# QSBL 123113

# QSBL 093013

# QSBL 063013

# QSBL 033113

# QSBL 123112

# QSBL 093012

# QSBL 063012

# QSBL 033112

# QSBL 123111

# QSBL 093011

# QSBL 063011

# QSBL 033111

# image1.png
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION





The
      undersigned, Bami Bastani, 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 September 30, 2006 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:
      November 8, 2006




By:
            /s/
                Bami BastaniBami
                BastaniPresident
                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.
<PAGE>   1


Exhibit 11.1 Statement Re: Computation of Per-Share Earnings        EXHIBIT 11.1


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                               Three Months Ended                   Nine Months Ended
                                                                   March 31,                              March 31,
                                                              1998              1997               1998               1997
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------
<S>                                                       <C>               <C>                <C>                <C>      
Basic
    Average common shares outstanding                        9,138,897         9,194,308          9,171,920          9,159,335
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------

    Net  Income (Loss)                                    $  3,147,655      $ (1,035,984)      $ (6,281,538)      $  1,369,421
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------

    Per Share amount                                      $       0.34      $      (0.11)      $      (0.68)      $       0.15
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------




Diluted
    Average common shares outstanding                        9,138,897         9,194,308          9,171,920          9,159,335
    Net effect of dilutive options and warrants-
       based on treasury stock method  using average
       market price                                            372,332                --                 --            872,653
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------
                                                             9,511,229         9,194,308          9,171,920         10,131,988
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------

    Net (Loss) income                                     $  3,147,655      $ (1,035,984)      $ (6,281,538)      $  1,369,421
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------

    Per Share amount                                      $       0.33      $      (0.11)      $      (0.68)      $       0.14
                                                          ------------      ------------       ------------       ------------

</TABLE>


                                       25
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION

ROBERT (BOB) ROSS, § 

 § 

Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, § 

 § 

v. § Civil Action No. 4:22-CV-00343-Y 

 § 

ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL § 

FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, § 

MCGAUGHEY, REBER AND § 

ASSOCIATES, INC., JULIE § 

HEDRICK, AND ERIK HARRIS, § 

 §

Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs. § 

AGREED ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL

Came on to be considered in the cause, the Agreed Motion for Withdrawal of Counsel for 

attorney Heather Abreu. The Court finds that the Motion is not sought for delay and should be 

GRANTED.

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Heather Abreu is withdrawn as counsel for Plaintiff 

and that Kerri Phillips will remain as the lead attorney-of-record for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant 

in this action.

SIGNED this__________ day of _____________, 2023.

 ________________________________________ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2

AGREED TO FORM:

HEATHER ABREU*

Texas Bar No. 24122577

K.D. Phillips Law Firm, PLLC

6010 Spring Creek Parkway

Plano, Texas 75024

Phone: (972) 327-5800 

Fax: (940) 400-0089 

Email: heather@KDphillipslaw.com

KERRI PHILLIPS

Texas Bar No. 24065906

K.D. Phillips Law Firm, PLLC

6010 Spring Creek Parkway

Plano, Texas 75024

Phone: (972) 327-5800 

Fax: (940) 400-0089 

Email: kerri@KDphillipslaw.com 

Counsels for Plaintiff Robert (Bob) Ross

SANFORD R. DENISON

Tex. Bar No. 05655560

Baab & Denison, LLP

6301 Gaston Ave., Suite 550

Dallas, TX 75214

Tel.: (214) 637-0750 

Fax.: (214) 637-0730 

Email: denison@baabdenison.com 

WILLIAM W. OSBORNE*

D.C. Bar No. 912089

Osborne Law Offices P.C.

5335 Wisconsin Avenue N.W., Suite 440

Washington, D.C. 20015

Tel.: (202) 243-3200 

Fax: (202) 686-2977 

Email: b.osborne@osbornelaw.com

Counsels for Defendant Counterclaim Plaintiff Association of Professional Flight Attendants, 

and Defendants Julie Hedrick and Erik Harris

*Admitted Pro Hac Vice
3

MICHAEL R RAKE

Tex. Bar No. 16487600

Michael R. Rake, Attorney at Law

PO Box 1556

Lake Dallas, TX 75065

Tel.: (940) 498-2103 

Fax: (940) 498-2103 

Email: mrake1@mrakeattorney.com

Counsel for Defendant McGaughey, Reber and Associates, Inc.
#### CLICK v. CLICK.

No. 6307.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Amarillo.

May 25, 1953.

Guy Hardin, Shamrock, for appellant.

Hill & Dougherty, Shamrock, for ap-pellee.

MARTIN, Justice.

Appellant, Faye Delores Click, recovered judgment of divorce against appellee, Olen Kenneth Click, in the district court of Gray County, Texas, on the 3rd day of October, 1952, which judgment was duly filed of record in the minutes of said court on the same date. No motion for a new trial was filed in the cause nor was any appeal taken from this judgment of the trial court. Following the granting of such judgment of divorce to appellant herein, she married one Blair Haney. On the 4th day of November, 1952, appellee filed a motion for temporary custody of the minor' child born of the marriage of appellant and appellee and in such motion also sought a hearing on the issue of permanent custody of said child. A hearing was had on this motion on the 2nd day of January, 1953, and at that time the court, on its own motion, set aside and dissolved the judgment of divorce which had been granted appellant on the 3rd day of October, 1952. ■

The only pleadings inyoking the jurisdiction of the district court of Gray County are solely with reference to the issue of the proper award of child custody as between appellant and appellee. The pleadings in the cause could not in any manner be construed a9 a bill of review attacking the entry of the original judgment of divorce. The district court of Gray County is a court vested with civil jurisdiction having successive terms in said county throughout the year, -without more than two days intervening between any of such 'terms.- It is-further apparent that more.than thirty days had elapsed after the rendition' of the original judgment of divorce and prior to the action' of the court in setting aside such judgment.

Appellant’s one point of error c.orrectly asserts that the trial court erred in setting-aside the judgment of divorce after the expiration of 30 days after the date of judgment in the absence of the filing of a bill of review as to such judgment. “Judgments of such civil district courts shall become as final after the expiration of 30 days after the date of judgment * * * the judgment cannot be set aside except by bill of review for sufficient cause”. Rule 330 (£), Vernon’s Texas Rules of Civil Procedure; Williams v. Pitts, Tex.Sup., 251 S.W.2d 148, Syl. 3, 4; Wichita Falls & S. R. Co. v. McDonald, 141 Tex, 555, 174 S.W.2d 951; Bridgman v. Moore, 143 Tex. 250, 183 S.W.2d 705. Appellant’s point of error is' sustained.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cáuse is remanded for a trial on the issue of child custody as presented by the pleadings in the cause.
Exhibit 10.6


 


ADDENDUM #2 TO PERSONAL EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


Dated April 8, 2014


 


By and between


 


Advanced Inhalation Therapies (AIT) Ltd.


(the "Company")


 


And


 


Racheli Vizman


I.D. 040785610


(the "Employee")


 


WHEREAS, the Company and
the Employee have entered into a Personal Employment Agreement Dated September 09, 2012, as amended on May 30, 2013 (the "Employment
Agreement"); Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Employment
Agreement; and


 


WHEREAS the parties wish to
amend the provisions of the Employment Agreement, as hereinafter provided.


 


NOW TEREFORE, in consideration
of the mutual promises contained herein, and intending to be legally bound, the parties hereto hereby declare and agree as follows:


 


1. Effective as of 1 April, 2014 ("Effective
Date")


 


		a.	Section 2.1 of the Employment Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and shall be replaced
with the following:



 


"The Employee shall be employed
by the Company on a full time basis. The Employee's scope of work shall be 100% of a full time position (the "Scope of
Work"). Employee Further undertakes to devote, in the Scope of Work, her entire business time, exclusively to the performance
of her duties in the Company".


 


		b.	Section 6.1 of the Employment Agreement will be amended such that Salary shall be in the amount
of NIS 33,333 instead of the amount of NIS 25,000.



 


2. All other provisions of the Employment Agreement
not amended herein shall remain in full force and effect.


 


[signatures page next]


 


Addendum #2 to Personal Employment Agreement-
Racheli Vizman


 















    1 


     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEROF, the parties
hereto have executed this Addendum as of the date first above written:


 


	/s/ Ari Raved	 	
        /s/ Racheli Vizman



	Advanced Inhalation Therapies (AIT) Ltd.	 	Racheli Vizman


 


	By: 	
        Ari Raved


	 
	Title:	Director	 


 


Addendum #2 to Personal Employment Agreement-
Racheli Vizman


 









    2
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-18-00493-CV

Style: Andrew Whallon

v. Candlelight Trails 1 Association

Date motion filed*: June 14, 2019

Type of motion: Motion to Supplement Clerk’s Record

Party filing motion: Appellee

Document to be filed:

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date:

Number of previous extensions granted: Current Due date: 

Date Requested:

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: 

 The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time absent extraordinary circumstances.

Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

Other: _____________________________________ 

We strike appellant’s Motion to Supplement the Clerk’s Record because said motion is deficient for failing 

to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5(e), 10.1(a)(5). The Court 

will consider a Motion to Supplement the Clerk’s Record that complies with the certificate of service and 

certificate of conference requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. 

 

Judge’s signature: /s/ Sherry Radack

 Acting individually Acting for the Court 

Panel consists of ____________________________________________

Date: __June 27, 2019____
NEVILLE LAYLOR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NOS. 1D15-2450/1D15-2451

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 22, 2016. 

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Frank E. Sheffield, Judge.

Jeffrey E. Lewis, General Counsel, and Michael J. Titus, Assistant Conflict 

Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Region One, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Samuel B. Steinberg, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

WOLF, J.

Appellant alleges the trial court erred by failing to enter a written order 

declaring appellant competent to stand trial even though the court orally declared 

him competent. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.212(c)(7) requires the trial 
2

court to enter a written order finding a defendant competent to proceed if that 

defendant has previously been declared incompetent. See White v. State, 548 So. 

2d 765, 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). We, therefore, agree that the trial court erred in 

failing to enter such a written order declaring appellant competent after his period 

of incompetence. We AFFIRM appellant’s judgment and sentence but REMAND

for the trial court to enter a nunc pro tunc order declaring appellant competent. See

Hunter v. State, 174 So. 3d 1011, 1014-15 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). 

LEWIS and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
| (logo) WELLS  FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon Street  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is herebymade to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1,2015, by and among DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE & ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION, asDepositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, LNRPARTNERS, LLC, as Special Servicer, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, asTrustee, and WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as CertificateAdministrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC,as Operating Advisor with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, COMM 2015-CCRE24 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized termsused herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section10.11 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.       Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and

 

2.       Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day ofFebruary 2018.

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive VicePresident 

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo)  Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|