alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 21

- 00374

- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF M.A. III , J.E.A., F.E.A., F.A.A., R.L. , Jr., and B.J.L. From the 285th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2019

- PA

- 02352 Honorable Peter A. Sakai , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Delivered and Filed: December 1, 2021
D ISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On August 4, 2021, th e trial court signed a final judgment terminating appellant’s parental rights to her children. Because this is an accelerated appeal, the notice of appeal was due to be filed on August 24, 2021. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 4.1(a), 26.1 (b), 28.4 . A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due to be filed on September 8, 2021. See id. R. 26.3 . On September 1, 2021, appellant filed her notice of appeal. Although appellant filed a notice of appeal within the fifteen

- day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3, s he did not file a motion for extension of time. A motion for extension of time i s necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the fifteen

- day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner ,04

- 21

- 00374

- CV

- 2

- 9 59 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. See id. ; T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C) ; see also Hone v. Hanafin , 104 S.W.3d 884, 886

– 87 (Tex. 2003) (holding “a reasonable explanation” is any plausible statement of circumstances indicating that failure to timely file was not deliberate or intentional but was the result of inadvertence, mistake or mischance, and that “any conduct short of deliberate or intentional noncompliance qualifies as inadvertence, mistake or mischance ”) (citation omitted)

. This court ordered appellant to show cause in writing by September 24, 2021, why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. We advised appellant that failure to respond timely would result in dismissal of this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(c). Additionally, on October 8, 2021 , and on October 25,
2021 , a deputy clerk of this court contacted the office of appellant’s counsel and advised of our show

- cause order. Appellant did not file a response. Accordingly, because appellant did n ot provide a reasonable explanation for failure to file a timely notice of appeal, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C), 42.3(b), (c); Verburgt , 959 S.W.2d at 615.
PER CURIAM
exv10w2







Exhibit 10.2




IDM PHARMA, INC.

2008 RETENTION COMPENSATION AND BONUS PLAN FOR CERTAIN

EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES AMENDED AND SUPERSEDING PARTICIPATION

AGREEMENT FOR ROBERT DE VAERE




     You have previously received a copy of the IDM Pharma, Inc. 2008 Retention and Bonus
Compensation Plan for Certain Executive Employees (the “Plan”) and a Plan Participation Agreement.
This Amended and Superseding Participation Agreement amends and supersedes the prior participation
agreement provided to you, which prior agreement shall hereafter be null and void. The Company’s
Board of Directors has designated you a participant in the Plan. Capitalized terms not defined
herein shall have the definitions set forth in the Plan. Provided that the eligibility
requirements of the Plan are satisfied, you are eligible to receive the following Plan Benefits:




          (1) For all purposes of the Plan, your Trigger Date is December 31, 2008.




          (2) Your Success Bonuses, if payable, will be $103,667 (CHMP) and $150,000 (transaction/Change
of Control).



     To indicate your acceptance of your designation as a Participant in the Plan, please sign a
copy of this Agreement in the space indicated below and return it on or before October 23, 2008.



ACCEPTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED:




     I hereby accept my designation as a Participant in the IDM Pharma, Inc. 2008 Retention
Compensation and Bonus Plan for Certain Executive Officers. I also acknowledge that I have been
advised to seek my own personal legal or tax advisors with respect to participation in the Plan.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	  /s/ Robert De Vaere

	 	Date:
	 	October 18, 2008
	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Robert De Vaere
<page>			            EXHIBIT 32.01



CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Annual Report of Morgan Stanley Spectrum
Select L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Walter Davis,
President of Demeter Management Corporation, the general partner
of the Partnership, 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:
(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 Partnership.





By:	  /s/	Walter Davis

Name:		Walter Davis
Title:	President

Date:		March 27, 2008
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
      OF
      2002**





In
      connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of ADDvantage Technologies Group,
      Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended September 30, 200 6 ,
      as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      “Report”) I, Daniel E. O'Keefe, the Chief 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:




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





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











December
      27, 2006        /s/
      Daniel E. O'Keefe


Daniel E. O'Keefe


Chief Financial Officer
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2355 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

25 New Chardon Street Lobby in Boston, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘John 

Fitzgerald Kennedy Post Office’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 30, 2018 

Ms. WARREN (for herself and Mr. MARKEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 25 New Chardon Street Lobby in Boston, 

Massachusetts, as the ‘‘John Fitzgerald Kennedy Post 

Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 25 New Chardon Street Lobby 

6 in Boston, Massachusetts, shall be known and designated 

7 as the ‘‘John Fitzgerald Kennedy Post Office’’. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2355 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘John Fitzgerald Ken5 nedy Post Office’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
i^yL-^ 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

J«&B ENTERPRISES, INC. dlj/a. RHYTHM FAA Docket No: 16-08-07 

SHINE, 

Complainant, MMMM I Wmm 

i^^-^Tj^iPl 

METROPOLITAN NASHVILLE AIRPORT 

AUTHORITY, 

Respondent. 

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS 

Pursuant to 14 CFR § 16.13(f), Attorney for Respondent Metropolitan Nashville Airport 

Authority, Arthur P. Berg, hereby submits this Notice of Change of Change of Address. 

Effective immediately, the contact information for Mr. Berg is as follows: 

Arthur P. Berg 

KAPLAN KIRSCH & ROCKWELL LLP ,--, 

641 Lexington Ave., Suite 1409 :g 

New York, NY 10022 O) 

Telephone: (212)328-9515 <r^ 

Facsimile: (646)514-5440 

E-mail: aberg@kaplankirsch.com 

Respectfully submitted this 6th day of November, 2008: 

Gs.«-KtXLisa A. Reynolds 

KAPLAN KIRSCH & ROCKWELL LLP 

1675 Broadway, Suite 2300 

Denver, CO 80202 

. •. ••:j': > 

—I ~Ci 

CD 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have this day served a true copy of the foregoing Notice of Change 

of Address on the following parties at the following addresses by U.S. Mail this 6*'^ day of 

November, 2008: 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

ATTN: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket, AGC 

Room 925 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

610 

Anthony W. Robinson 

Blaine A'mmon White 

MBELDEF 

1100 Mercantile Lane, Suite 115-A 

Largo, MD 20774 

Raymond G. Prince, Esquire 

Tennessee Litigation Counsel 

PRINCE &. HELLINGER, P.C. 

150 Second Avenue North, Suite 300 

Nashville, Tennessee 37201-1902 

Sharon Long 

Airports and Environmental Law Division 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

USC^ l^J^^ 

Lisa A. Reynolds, 

Counsel for Respondent Metropolitan 

Nashville Airport Authority
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 02-6276

ERIC E. ALVAREZ,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.

Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge.

(CR-97-47, CA-01-75-H)

Submitted: May 7, 2002

Decided: June 19, 2002

Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and

HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Eric E. Alvarez, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Eric E. Alvarez appeals the district court’s denial of his motion

filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) and his

motion to reconsider. The notice of appeal in this case was received

in the district court after expiration of the sixty day appeal period following the denial of Alvarez’s motion to reconsider. However, Alvarez dated his notice of appeal prior to the expiration of the appeal

period. Under Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988), the notice

of appeal is deemed filed on the date it was delivered to prison officials. Because the record as it stands does not indicate when Alvarez

delivered his notice of appeal to prison officials for mailing, we cannot determine whether the notice of appeal is timely. 

The record is similarly unclear as to the date Alvarez filed his

motion to reconsider from the court’s order denying relief in his

habeas motion. Under Houston v. Lack, the motion to reconsider is

deemed filed as of the date the petitioner delivered it to prison officials for forwarding to the court. See United States v. Duke, 50 F.3d

571, 575 (8th Cir. 1995). Although Alvarez’s motion to reconsider

was received by the district court clerk approximately one month after

denial of his § 2255 motion, Alvarez alleges he delivered the motion

to the proper prison officials on the tenth day following the district

court’s decision. The date Alvarez delivered the motion to reconsider

to prison officials must be ascertained by the district court as the timing of the filing of that motion determines whether it is properly considered under Fed R. Civ. P. 59(e) or Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). See In re

Burnley, 988 F.2d 1 (4th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, we remand the case

for the district court to determine the timeliness of the filing of the

notice of appeal under Houston v. Lack. In the event that the court

concludes that Alvarez’s notice of appeal was timely filed, it must

then determine whether Alvarez’s motion to reconsider was delivered

to prison officials for mailing no later than the tenth day following the

denial of Alvarez’s § 2255 motion. The record, as supplemented, will

then be returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED

2 UNITED STATES v. ALVAREZ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF POST PROPERTIES, INC. FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000903127
<NAME> POST PROPERTIES, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                      15,322,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                   2,167,761,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             235,032,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,984,151,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                    787,328,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     50,000
<COMMON>                                       360,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 982,194,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,984,151,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           219,409,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              113,482,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          23,488,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             74,572,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         55,690,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                55,690,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.60
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
      OF
      2002**





In
      connection with the Annual Report on
      Form 10-K/A of ADDvantage Technologies Group, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year
      ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
      on the date hereof (the “Report”) I, Daniel E. O'Keefe, the Chief 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:





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







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








/s/  Daniel
      E. O’Keefe


Name:   Daniel
      E.
      O'Keefe


Title:     
      Chief Financial Officer


Date:     December
      6,
      2007
EXHIBIT 32.02








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Annual Report of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Spectrum Select L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Christian Angstadt, Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, 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:




(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 Partnership.




















By:             /s/            Christian Angstadt





Name:                    Christian Angstadt


Title:                      Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management LLC,


general partner of the registrant





Date:                      March 29, 2010
**Exhibit
      32.2**





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 Annual Report of PLM Equipment Growth Fund VI (the
“Partnership”), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      the undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner and of
      the
      Partnership, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:





(1)  the
      Report of the Partnership filed today 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
      Partnership.














/s/
      Richard K
      Brock


Richard
      K
      Brock


Chief
      Financial
      Officer of PLM Financial Services, Inc.


(Principal
      Financial
      Officer)


March
      29,
      2006
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Retail Ventures, Inc. on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-100398, 333-70440, 333-45856,
333-45852, 333-66239, 333-15961, 333-15957, 33-95966, 33-80588, 33-78586,
33-50198 and 33-46221) of our report (with an explanatory paragraph regarding
adoption of Financial Accounting Standard No. 142) dated April 27, 2004,
appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Retail Ventures, Inc. for the
year ended January 31, 2004.

/s/Deloitte & Touche  LLP

Columbus, Ohio
April 27, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997, AND NOTES THERETO,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,230
<SECURITIES>                                    16,869
<RECEIVABLES>                                      159
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,812
<PP&E>                                           7,725
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,293
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  29,925
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,019
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      9,682
<COMMON>                                       137,604
<OTHER-SE>                                    (124,076)<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    29,925
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,115
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,530<F2>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,377)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,038)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,038)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   (859)<F3>
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,897)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.33)
<FN>
<F1>CONSISTS OF ACCUMULATED DEFICIT AND ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME.
<F2>CONSISTS OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, AND GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.
<F3>CONSISTS OF LOSS FROM DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS AND EQUITY IN LOSS OF AFFILIATE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT 

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED 

CLIFFORD W. JONES, JR., 

Appellant, 

v. Case No. 5D14-0008 

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

O/B/O SANDRA L. JONES, 

Appellee. 

 / 

Opinion filed July 18, 2014 

Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Orange County, 

Sally D. M. Kest, Judge. 

Clifford W. Jones, Jr., Spring Hill, pro se. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and William H. Branch, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, 

for Appellee. 

ON CONCESSION OF ERROR 

PER CURIAM. 

 Pursuant to Appellee's Concession of Error, we reverse the trial court's December 

2, 2013, final order on motion to vacate order, and remand to the court to make findings 

pursuant to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615(1)(d) and for further 

proceedings, if necessary. Trisotto v. Trisotto, 966 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

REVERSED and REMANDED. 

TORPY, C.J., ORFINGER and BERGER, JJ., concur.