alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE – PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

JEFFREY OWENS, et al.,

Plaintiff,

v.

AMK DESOTO, INC., et al,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 3:22-cv-1455-X

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Plaintiffs Jeff and Joseph Owens (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants AMK Desoto, Inc. and

Ahmad Khatib, Individually (“Defendants”) stipulate and agree that since Plaintiffs no longer 

desire to pursue their claims against Defendants, any and all allegations, claims, and defenses 

asserted by and between them in the above-styled and numbered action should be dismissed with 

prejudice pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(1)(ii) and that each party shall bear their own fees and 

costs. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Defendants respectfully request the Court enter an order 

dismissing with prejudice any and all claims asserted by and between Plaintiffs and Defendants 

in this action with each party bearing their own attorney’s fees and costs.

Case 3:22-cv-01455-X Document 17 Filed 09/20/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 48
JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE – PAGE 2

Respectfully Submitted,

WELMAKER LAW, PLLC

409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118

Longview Texas 75601

Telephone (512) 799-2048

By: /s/ Douglas B. Welmaker

Douglas B. Welmaker

Texas State Bar No. 00788641

doug@welmakerlaw.com

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS

By: /s/ Shabaz A. Nizami

SHABAZ A. NIZAMI

State Bar No. 24079058 

shabaz.nizami@sargentlawtx.com 

SARGENT LAW, P.C. 

1717 Main Street, Suite 4750

Dallas, Texas 75201

(214) 749-6516 

(214) 749-6316 (fax) 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that the foregoing Joint Stipulation of Dismissal has been electronically served 

on all counsel of record via Notice of Electronic Filing on a known Filing User through the 

CM/ECF system on September 20, 2023.

/s/ Douglas B. Welmaker 

Douglas B. Welmaker

Case 3:22-cv-01455-X Document 17 Filed 09/20/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 49
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6263

THOMAS D. CROOKS, JR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

MICHAEL MOORE, Director of SCDC; WILLIAM R.

DAVIS, Warden of Lee Correctional Institution;

CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General for the

State of South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-97-2198-2-17AJ)

Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: June 2, 1998

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas D. Crooks, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief

Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998) and denying his motions for reconsideration. We have

reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Crooks

v. Moore, No. CA-97-2198-2-17AJ (D.S.C. Dec. 17, 1997). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
Knoll, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Barry L. McCabe, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), that to my knowledge:



| | a. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | b. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 11, 2008



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Barry L. McCabe    
|Barry L. McCabe        
|Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               5
<MULTIPLIER>            1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                           13,429
<SECURITIES>                     73,516
<RECEIVABLES>                    27,204
<ALLOWANCES>                        290
<INVENTORY>                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                115,758
<PP&E>                          201,124
<DEPRECIATION>                   42,451
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  276,170
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            46,095
<BONDS>                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<COMMON>                          4,104
<OTHER-SE>                      223,346
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    276,170
<SALES>                          35,370
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 54,456
<CGS>                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    32,747
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  1,872
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  228
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  23,327
<INCOME-TAX>                      9,412
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              13,915
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                     13,915
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      0.85
<EPS-DILUTED>                      0.85
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

             PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                  SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of American Natural Energy Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Steven P. Ensz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

         1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

/s/ Steven P. Ensz
------------------


Steven P. Ensz
Chief Financial Officer
August 15, 2003
#### HERD v. STATE.

No. 20731.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 31, 1940.

Owen & Bohannon, of Brownwood, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

Conviction for a misdemeanor; punishment being assessed at a fine of $200.

The verdict reads, as follows: “Guilty. Penalty $200. Joe M. Stacy.”

Appellant’s contention that the verdict is insufficient must be sustained. In Mo-neyhun v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 136 S.W.2d 219 this day delivered, the court held the following verdict to be insufficient:

> “No. 10311. Guilty, 90 days in jail.

> ■ “Geo. T. Moore, Foreman.”

In the course of the opinion in the Mon-eyhun case the court said: “Too much can not be left to interpretation, nor to speculation. Probably this jury intended to find defendant guilty and to assess his punishment at confinement in the county jail for ninety days, but it would take rather a comprehensive interpolation to thus write their verdict. For example we will attempt to do so, placing the interpolated words in parentheses: ‘(We, the jury, find the defendant) guilty, (and assess his punishment at) 90 days in jail. Geo. T. Moore, Foreman.’

“It will be noted that the major portion of this verdict has to come by our construction, and we are impressed with the idea that such is too great a departure from Art. 693, C.C.P., which reads as follows: ‘The verdict in every criminal action must be general. Where there are special pleas upon which the jury are to find, they must say in their verdict that the allegations in such pleas are true or untrue. If the plea is not guilty, they must find that the defendant is either “guilty” or “not guilty,” and they shall assess the punishment in all cases where the same is not absolutely fixed by law to spme particular penalty/

“We are not willing to lend our approval to such a scantily worded verdict as here presented. To do such would establish a precedent that might finally eventuate in but two words upon the part of the jury in its verdict, leaving the balance of a complete verdict to be interpolated by others than the jury.”

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
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 this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Berkley Resources
      Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report").  I, Lindsay Gorrill, Principal Financial Officer of the
      Company, 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 best of my knowledge
      and belief:





(1)
            the
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and





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











Dated:
      November 13,
      2007                                                  */s/
      Lindsay Gorrill*


Lindsay
      Gorrill, Principal Financial
      Officer
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00505-CR

NO. 03-12-00506-CR

NO. 03-12-00507-CR

Nathan Kevin Carter, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOS. 65625, 65626 & 65627, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Nathan Kevin Carter seeks to appeal three judgments of conviction for

burglary of a habitation. The trial court has certified that (1) these are plea bargain cases and Carter

has no right of appeal, and (2) Carter has waived the right to appeal these cases. Accordingly, we

dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).

__________________________________________

Diane M. Henson, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Henson

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: August 17, 2012

Do Not Publish
EXHIBIT 10.32

                                [EVCI Letterhead]

Richard Goldenberg
c/o EVCI Career Colleges Holding Corp.
1 Van Der Donck Street, 2nd Floor
Yonkers, NY 10701

                                          March 31, 2005

Dear Mr. Goldenberg:

      This letter, when countersigned by you, amends your Employment Agreement
entered into as of January 1, 2003 with EVCI Career Colleges Holding Corp. (the
"Employment Agreement"). All defined terms in the Employment Agreement shall
have the same meanings herein. All references herein to a "section" means the
section of the Employment Agreement unless the context requires otherwise.

      1. In lieu of the only sentence of Section 2, the following is hereby
inserted:

      For his services pursuant to this Agreement, EVCI will pay Executive a
salary at the annual rate of $210,000 ("Salary").

      2. Except as specifically amended above the Employment Agreement shall
remain in full force and effect.

                                          Very truly yours,

                                          EVCI CAREER COLLEGES HOLDING CORP.


                                          By:  /s/Dr. John J. McGrath
                                               ----------------------
                                               Dr. John J. McGrath
                                               CEO and President


Agreed:

/s/ Richard Goldenberg
----------------------
Richard Goldenberg
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1838 

To repeal the authority under the National Labor Relations Act for States 

to enact laws prohibiting agreements requiring membership in a labor 

organization as a condition of employment, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 

Ms. WARREN (for herself, Mr. BROWN, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. 

MERKLEY, Mr. MARKEY, and Ms. HASSAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To repeal the authority under the National Labor Relations 

Act for States to enact laws prohibiting agreements requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Workers 

5 and Improving Labor Standards Act’’. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1838 IS

1 SEC. 2. PREEMPTING STATE RIGHT-TO-WORK LAWS. 

2 Subsection (b) of section 14 of the National Labor 

3 Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 164) is repealed. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 232 (Friday, December 1, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75240-75241]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30659]

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

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED

Procurement List; Proposed Additions

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed additions to procurement list.

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

SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing to add to the Procurement List 
commodities and a service to be furnished by nonprofit agencies 
employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.
    Comments must be Received on or Before: January 2, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, Virginia 22202-3259.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louis R. Bartalot (703) 603-7740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published pursuant to 41 
U.S.C. 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested 
persons an opportunity to submit comments on

[[Page 75241]]

the possible impact of the proposed actions.
    If the Committee approves the proposed additions, all entities of 
the Federal Government (except as otherwise indicated) will be required 
to procure the commodities and the service listed below from nonprofit 
agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe 
disabilities. I certify that the following action will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major 
factors considered for this certification were:
    1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, 
recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other 
than the small organizations that will furnish the commodities and the 
service to the Government.
    2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish 
the commodities and the service to the Government.
    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would 
accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-
48c) in connection with the commodities and the service proposed for 
addition to the Procurement List. Comments on this certification are 
invited.
    Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the 
certification on which they are providing additional information.

Proposed Additions

    The following commodities and service have been proposed for 
addition to Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies 
listed:

Toner, Cartridges, New

7510-01-417-1220
7510-01-417-1222
7510-01-443-2121
    NPA: Alabama Industries for the Blind, Talladega, Alabama

Janitorial/Grounds Maintenance

Nininger U.S. Army Reserve Center, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
    NPA: Goodwill Industries of Broward County, Inc., Ft. 
Lauderdale, Florida

Louis R. Bartalot,
Deputy Director (Operations).
[FR Doc. 00-30659 Filed 11-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 236 (Thursday, December 7, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 76653]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-31204]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other 
Communications Disorders Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: January 9, 2001.
    Time: 2:00 pm to 4:30 pm.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: 6120 Executive Blvd., Suite 400C, Rockville, MD 20852, 
(Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Craig A. Jordan, Phd, Chief, Scientific Review 
Branch, NIH/NIDCD/DER, Executive Plaza South, Room 400C, Bethesda, 
MD 20892-7180, 301-496-8683.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.173, 
Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communicative Disorders, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 28, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-31204 Filed 12-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
FILED

KAREN MITCHELL

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT 

COURT January 18, 2024

Case 3:22-cr-00397-B Document 44 Filed 01/18/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 132
#### Ex parte HOWELL.

No. 19999.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 12, 1938.

J. W. Culwell, of Amarillo, for appellant.

Lloyd D. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court of Potter County refusing to reduce the amount of bail required in two cases pending against the appellant in said court. It appears from the record that appellant has been indicted by the grand jury of Potter County in two cases, one charging assault with intent to murder and the other alleging that appellant committed the offense of extortion and kidnapping. In the first case the court required a bond in the amount of $1,000, while in the second case the amount required was $3,500. In remanding appellant the court below entered an order reading in part as follows:

> “On this day came on to be heard this matter. The defendant appeared in Court in person in the custody of the Sheriff of Potter County, Texas, and with her attorney; and the State of Texas was represented by the District Attorney and by the Assistant District Attorney. And the Court after hearing the pleadings and the evidence, is of the opinion that the bonds heretofore set by the Court in causes Nos. 6319 and 6320 wherein the relator, Mable Howell, is charged with the offenses of Assault with Intent to Murder and of Kidnapping for the purpose of Extortion, have not been shown to be and are not excessive; and whereas it has not been shown that any effort has been made to make said bonds for the relator herein, defendant in said causes Nos. 6319 and *6320,*since *the*indictments were returned in said cases and since the bonds therein were fixed by this Court, the Court is of the opinion that said bonds should not be reduced, but that the relator should be remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Potter County, Texas, in accordance with law, pending the making of proper bonds in said causes Nos. 6319 and 6320 in the amounts heretofore set by this court.”

Before appellant would be entitled to ask for a reduction in the amount of bail required by the court, it devolved upon her to show her inability to give bail in said amounts. It is observed that according to the finding of the trial judge appellant made no effort to make bonds in the amount fixed by the court. See Ex parte Burleson, 133 Tex.Cr.R. 75, 109 S.W.2d 200.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
EXHIBIT 10.1


 


MODIFICATION TO
PROMISSORY NOTE


 


WHEREAS, on January 1,
1995, Lee Pharmaceuticals (“Maker”) and Megan Amy Lee (“Holder”) entered into
an agreement (“Note”) whereby Lee Pharmaceuticals was to pay to Megan Amy Lee
the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars; and


 


WHEREAS, the parties
thereto desire to modify said Note;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the
parties modify said Note as follows:


 


1.                    The maturity date of the Note is extended
from January 1, 2005, until January 1, 2010.


 


2.                    This Note may be extended for an additional
five years beyond the maturity date at the option of Lee Pharmaceuticals.


 


3.                    All other terms and conditions of the
Note remain the same.


 


 


	
  February 24,
  2005

  	
   

  	
  RONALD
  G. LEE

  
	
  Date

  	
  Lee Pharmaceuticals –
  Ronald G. Lee

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  February 24,
  2005

  	
   

  	
  MICHAEL
  L. AGRESTI

  
	
  Date

  	
  Lee Pharmaceuticals –
  Michael L. Agresti
<PAGE>   1


                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

                     CONSENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Fuisz Technologies Ltd. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-03347), and Form S-3 (File
No. 333-41037), of our report, dated February 25, 1999, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements of Fuisz Technologies Ltd. as of December 31,
1998 and 1997, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
1998, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also
consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Selected Financial
Data".

                                                    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

McLean, Virginia
March 31, 1999



===============================================================================
                                      Page 39