alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-05-00485- CR Vi c ki J e anni ne K nig htaka Vi c ki J e an Knig ht , A ppe lla nt v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 7 OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. 67511 7, HO NORAB LE WILLIAM E. BENDER, JUDGE PRESI DING

M E M O R

A N D UM O P I N I O N The trial c ourt found appe llant Vicki J eannine Knigh t guilty of theft a nd assessed punishment at 180 day s’ incar cer ation and a $2000 fine . SeeTex. P en. Code Ann. § 31.03( a), ( e)( 3) (We st Su pp . 2 00 5) . Th e c ourt su sp e nd e d imp os iti on of se nte nc e and

pla c e d a pp e lla nt o n c omm

un ity supervision. Appellant re prese nts herself on appea l. A repor ter’s r ecor d was not re quested a nd, afte r appe llant was g iven notice a nd an opportunity

to cure , the appe al was submitted for de cision without a repor

ter’s r ecor d. See Tex. R. App. P . 37.3(c) (1). Appellant did not file a brief or respond to this C ourt’s notices. SeeTex. R. App. P. 38.8( b)(4) . We ha ve examined the rec ord befor e us and find no fundame ntal err or that should be conside red in the inter est of justice.2 The judg ment of convic tion is affirmed.

__________________________________________ David Puryear , J ustice Be fore J ustices B . A. Smith, P uryear and Waldrop Affir med Filed: May

5, 2006 Do No t Pu

bli sh
EXHIBIT 31.2






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






I, Brian Lukian, certify that:




1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Enhance Skin Products Inc;




2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;




3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;




4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for registrant and have:




(a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period
in which this report is being prepared;




(b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and




(c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting; and




5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




(a)   All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and




(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.






By:
/s/ Brian LukianDate: September 21, 2009

Brian LukianSecretary, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00374-CV

BILL VACKAR AND KATY VACKAR APPELLANTS

V.

LADINA VACKAR APPELLEE

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

FROM THE 431ST DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

On December 16, 2013, this court received a letter from the appellants’ 

counsel, stating that the appellants no longer wished to pursue the appeal. We 

responded by stating that if appellants failed to file a motion to dismiss complying 

with rule 42.1(a)(1) on or before February 21, 2014, this court would dismiss the 

appeal on its own motion. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 42.3(c), 43.2(f). We 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

have received no response. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f). 

/s/ Bob McCoy

BOB MCCOY

JUSTICE

PANEL: MCCOY, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DELIVERED: March 6, 2014
**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 Quarterly Report of Western Goldfields Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Brian Penny, Chief
      Financial Officer (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:




(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.




Date:
      August 3, 2007


By:
            /s/ Brian
              PennyBrian
              PennyChief
              Financial Officer (Principal Financial
              Officer)




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 has been
      provided to the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or its staff upon request.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.A
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  /s/ JAMES J. CLEARYJames J. ClearyPresident(Principal Executive Officer)November 5, 2007
Attachment 3: 

INFORMATION PROVIDED DOES NOT VERIFY FAMILY MEMBER ELIGIBILITY

FOR EMPLOYING OFFICE/TRIBAL EMPLOYER USE 

FAMILY MEMBER ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION

[INSERT DATE]

[INSERT EMPLOYEE NAME AND ADDRESS]

We have reviewed the documents you submitted to verify Federal Employees Health Benefits

(FEHB) eligibility for your family member(s). Based on our review, the documents are not 

sufficient to verify eligibility. Therefore, we have determined that the person(s) listed below are 

not eligible for coverage under your FEHB enrollment. 

 1. [INSERT NAME OF INELIGIBLE FAMILY MEMBER]

2. [INSERT NAME OF INELIGIBLE FAMILY MEMBER] 

The documentation submitted was not approved due to: 

[INSERT REASON]

This is an initial decision. You have the right to request that we reconsider this decision. A 

request for reconsideration must be filed with the employing office listed below within 60 

calendar days from the date of this letter. A request for reconsideration must be made in writing 

and must include your name, address, Social Security Number (or other personal identifier, e.g. 

plan member number), your family member’s name, the name of your FEHB plan, reason(s) for 

the request, and, if applicable, retirement claim number. Please also include a copy of this letter. 

If the reconsideration decision reverses the family member’s denial, the FEHB Carrier will begin 

coverage retroactively to the date on which it would have been effective had the original request 

been approved. 

Send your request for reconsideration to: 

[INSERT CONTACT INFORMATION]

The above office will issue a final decision to you within 30 calendar days of receipt of your 

request for reconsideration. If you need more time to submit your reconsideration request, please 

contact the employing office listed above in writing. 

As a reminder, any intentionally false statement or willful misrepresentation, such as including 

ineligible family members on a health insurance plan, is a violation of the law punishable by a 

fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both (18 USC 1001), 

and may be subject to investigation. 

 If you have questions about this letter, you may contact us at: 
[INSERT EMPLOYING OFFICE/TRIBAL EMPLOYER INFO]

[SIGNATURE]

 

cc: [FEHB Carrier]
EXHIBIT 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-191588) pertaining to the Empire State Realty Trust, Inc.
Empire State Realty OP, L.P. 2013 Equity Incentive Plan of our reports (a) dated March 24, 2014, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedules of Empire State Realty OP, L.P. and (b) dated March 24, 2014
with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Empire State Building Company, L.L.C. and Affiliates, each included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2013.



|                     
|---------------------
|/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
|New York, New York   
|March 24, 2014
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of SaveDaily, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jeff Mahony, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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 result of operations
of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|/s/ JEFF MAHONY         | 
|----------------------- | 
|                        | 
|Jeff Mahony             | 
|Chief Executive Officer | 
|                        | 
|May 15, 2013            | 



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 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  The foregoing certifications are accompanying
the Company's Form 10-Q solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,
chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yf i nds thi s c a s e s ui t abl e f

orde c i s i on w i thout ** o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). I H / R es ear ch NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON

UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T ED G A R D A N I EL RO SA LES, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E RJ r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 71285 A ge nc yN o. A 072- 518- 615 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d N ove m be r17, 2009 ** B efo re: A L A R C Ó N , T R O T T , an dT A S H IM A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. E dgarD ani e l R os a l e s , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of G ua t e m a l a , pe t i t i ons f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l f r o m an im m ig r a tio n ju d g e ’s r e m o v a l o r d e r . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n p u r s u an t to 

# FI LED DE C 08 2009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSI H / Res ea r ch 08- 71285 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o , Sa ndoval-L ua v. G on zales , 499 F . 3d 1121, 1 1 2 6 - 2 7 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 7 ) , an dwe d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. W e a gree w i th the B IA ’ s c on clusi on thatR osal es i s r em ov abl e und er8 U . S . C . § 1227( a ) ( 2) ( A ) ( i i i ) a s an a ggr a va t e d f e l on unde rbe c aus e hi s c onvi c t i on unde rC a l i f

orni aP e na l C ode § 245( a ) ( 1) c a t e gor i c a l l yc ons t i tut e s ac r i m e of vi ol e nc e and he w a s s e nt e nc e d t o at e rm of i m pr i s onm e ntof

a tl e a s tone y e arf

or h is c r im e . See U

ni te d States v . H

e r on- Sal i nas , 566 F . 3d 898, 899 ( 9th C i r . 2009) (p er cu ri u m ) (C al . P en al C o d e § 2 4 5 co n t ai n s th e req u i si t e m en s rea t o q u al i fy as a cr i m e of vi ol ence un der 18 U . S . C . § 1 6). R o s a le s ’ r e m a in in g c o n te n tio n s la c km e r it. P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
##### 



Exhibit 99.1
 (CAL DIVE LOGO)
    
    
    
    400 N. Sam Houston Parkway E.
Suite 1000
Houston, TX 77060-3500
(281) 618-0400
(281) 848-6502 fax(HORIZON LOGO)
    
    
    
    2500 CityWest Boulevard
Suite 2200
Houston, TX 77042-3097
(713) 361-2600
(713) 361-2690 fax
 FOR IMMEDIATE
    
    Cal Dive Contact:
    
    Horizon Contact:RELEASE
    
    G. Kregg Lunsford
    
    Ronald D. MogelChief Financial Officer
    
    Chief Financial OfficerJune 11, 2007
    
    (281) 618-0516
    
    (713) 243-2753
 Cal Dive International to Acquire Horizon Offshore
   
    
    Diversify Cal Dives vessel fleet and services offering with the addition of
complementary assets consisting of pipelay, pipebury and derrick barges
    
    Expand Cal Dives geographic footprint, enhancing international growth
opportunities and further diversifying the companys operations
    
    Provide for greater economies of scale and increased operational flexibility
    
    Be accretive to earnings and cash flow per share
    
    Preserve Cal Dives financial flexibility for future growth initiatives




---



##### 



Transaction Details




---



##### 



Advisors
  Conference Call
   About Cal Dive International
  About Horizon Offshore
  Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Statements




---



##### 



Additional Information
  Participants in the Solicitation




---



#####
#### Emmett GINN v. STATE.

No. 17749.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 27, 1935.

Wilkinson & Wilkinson, of Mt. Vernon, for appellant.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

This is a prosecution had under the provisions of what is known as the Dean Law (Pen.Code 1925, art. 666 et seq., as amended). Following what has been said by us in an opinion this day handed down in Guy Meadows v. State, 88 S.W.(2d) 481, the jttdgment in this case will be reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00129-CR

Mohammed Shafique

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

§

From Criminal District Court No. 4

of Tarrant County 

(C-4-010479-0970661-A)

May 12, 2016

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

 Justice Lee Gabriel
##### 



(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/ Andrew P. BecnelName:
    
    Andrew P. BecnelTitle:
    
    Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial OfficerDate:
    
    November 1, 2007
Exhibit 35.5



|     |                                            |                         
|---- | ------------------------------------------ | ------------------------
|LOGO |                                            | Corporate Trust Services
|     | MAC R1204-010                             
|     | 9062 Old Annapolis Road Columbia, MD
21045
|     | Tel: 410 884 2000 Fax: 410
715 2380       
|    

Citibank, National Association

388 Greenwich Street

14th Floor

New York, New York 10013



|Re: | Annual Statement of Compliance for Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2012-4 Mortgage Pass- Through Certificates, Series 2012-4
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Per the Amended and Restated Pooling and Servicing dated as of January 1, 2014 (the Agreement), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Master Servicer (Wells Fargo), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the Reporting Period):

(a) A review of Wells Fargos activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such
officers supervision; and

(b) To the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of
its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.



|                              |  | 
|----------------------------- |  | 
|March 1, 2017                
|                             
|LOGO                         
|Kristen Cronin Vice
President



|                       |  |     
|---------------------- |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | LOGO
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-41751

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RENE OSVALDO SALINAS-ROMO,

Defendant-Appellant,

 

Consolidated with 

No. 03-40007

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RENE OSBALDO SALINAS-ROMO, also known as Arnoldo Guzman-Romo,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-02-CR-413-ALL

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*
No. 02-41751

c/w No. 03-40007

-2-

R. 47.5.4.

Rene Osvaldo Salinas-Romo appeals his guilty-plea conviction

and sentence for being found illegally present in the United

States after deportation as well as the subsequent revocation of

a term of supervised release from an earlier conviction. He

argues, pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000),

that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(1) and (2) are elements of the offense, not sentence

enhancements, making those provisions unconstitutional. Salinas

concedes that this argument is foreclosed and he raises it for

possible review by the Supreme Court. 

This argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United

States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). We must follow the precedent

set in Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court

itself determines to overrule it.” United States v. Dabeit, 231

F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000) (internal quotation and citation

omitted).

AFFIRMED.
**EXHIBIT      32**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350 AS ADOPTED**

**PURSUANT      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 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. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                  May 15, 2008 |
|-------------------------------------|
|                                |   |
| By:                                 | /s/                  Gregory E. Thomas  |
| Name:                               | Gregory                  E. Thomas |
| Title:                              | General                  Manager & Principle Executive Officer |
|                                |   |
| By:                                 | /s/                  Michael R. Council |
| Name:                               | Michael                  R. Council |
| Title:                              | Chief                  Financial Officer |

----
#### SUELL et al. v. STATE.

No. 19089.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 9, 1937.

Joe Ellington, of Center, for appellants.

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

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The offense is robbery; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for five years.

The record is before this court without statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment appears regular and regularly presented. No error has been perceived or pointed out, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.