alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-22-00207-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 231st District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 231-707831-21

Before Kerr, Birdwell, and Bassel, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr 

EDDIE LEE DAUGHERTY, Appellant

V. 

TAYLOR REANN PINKSTON, Appellee
2 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Eddie Lee Daugherty attempts to appeal from the trial court’s February 15, 

2022 family-violence protective order. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 81.001, 81.009, 

85.001(b), 85.022. Because Daugherty timely moved for a new trial, his notice of 

appeal was due May 16, 2022. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(1). But Daugherty did not 

file his notice of appeal until May 31, 2022, making it untimely. See id.

On June 2, 2022, we notified the parties by letter of our concern that we lack 

jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal was untimely filed. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 26.1. We warned that we could dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction 

unless Daugherty or any party wanting to continue the appeal filed a response by June 

13, 2022, showing a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal.

See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 26.3(b), 42.3(a), 43.2(f). We have received no response.

The time for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional in this court, and without 

a timely filed notice of appeal or a timely filed extension request, we must dismiss the 

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 2, 25.1(b), 26.1, 26.3; Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 

676, 677 (Tex. 1998); Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). A motion

for extension of time is necessarily implied when, as here, an appellant acting in good 

faith files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the 15-

day period in which the appellant would be entitled to move to extend the filing 

deadline under Rule 26.3. See Jones, 976 S.W.2d at 677; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617; see

also Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, 26.3. But even when an extension motion is implied, the 
3 

appellant still must reasonably explain the need for an extension. See Jones, 976 S.W.2d 

at 677; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617.

Because Daugherty’s notice of appeal was untimely and because Daugherty did 

not provide a reasonable explanation for needing an extension, we dismiss this appeal 

for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); see Veritek LLC v. TBI

Constr. Servs. LLC, No. 02-20-00287-CV, 2021 WL 62129, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort 

Worth Jan. 7, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.). 

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr

Elizabeth Kerr

Justice

Delivered: June 30, 2022
No. 82-987.

#### McDonald et al. *v.*Texas.

Ct. App. Tex., 2d Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1545 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1545

                     One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
          the third day of January, two thousand and seventeen

                                 An Act

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the authority of the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to disclose certain patient information to 
 State controlled substance monitoring programs, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
    This Act may be cited as the ``VA Prescription Data Accountability 
Act 2017''.
SEC. 2. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS DISCLOSURE OF PATIENT INFORMATION 
TO STATE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE MONITORING PROGRAMS.
    Section 5701(l) of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
        (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``Under'';
        (2) by striking ``a veteran or the dependent of a veteran'' and 
    inserting ``a covered individual''; and
        (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
    ``(2) In this subsection, a `covered individual' is an individual 
who is dispensed medication prescribed by an employee of the Department 
or by a non-Department provider authorized to prescribe such medication 
by the Department.''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### Rutkowski, Respondent, vs. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company, Appellant.

*November 9*

December *7, 1926.*

The evidence in this case not substantially differing from that in *Rusczck v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co., ante,*p. 130, the decision in that case is followed.

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: Otto H. Breidenbach; Circuit Judge.

*Reversed.*

*John F. Baker*of Milwaukee, for the appellant.

For the respondent there was a brief by *Cannon & Wal-dron*of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Ray J. Cannon.*

Owen, J.

This action is brought by the widow of Joseph Rutkowski, deceased, to recover damages resulting from his death. He was killed in a collision between the automobile which he was driving and a moving .train on a street crossing in the city of- Kenosha. Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff for $10,000 damages, from which judgment the defendant appealed.

*403The accident in which the deceased came to his death was considered by this court in *Rusczck v. C. & N. W. R. Co., ante,*p. 130, 210 N. W. 361. The deceased, Rut-kowski, was the driver of the car in which Rusczck was riding at the time of his death. It was there held that, conceding negligence on the part of the railroad company, the negligence of Rutkowski was an intervening negligence which constituted the proximate cause of the collision, and that consequently the plaintiff could not recover. Except in certain unimportant details, the evidence in this case does not differ from the evidence in the *Rusczck Case,*and the decision in that case must be followed in this. Accordingly, the judgment appealed from must be reversed, and cause remanded with instructions to enter judgment dismissing plaintiff’s complaint.

*By the Court.*— So ordered.

CROWNhart, J., dissents.
Exhibit 32.1

  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Quarterly Report of Speedus Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Shant S.
Hovnanian, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive 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 of 1934, amended; 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 14, 2003


By:    /s/ Shant S. Hovnanian
       -------------------------
Name:  Shant S. Hovnanian
Title: Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       20
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNews Releases1997

# Note to Editors: Maine Yankee Meeting

----

----

I-97-62

June 2, 1997

**NOTE TO EDITORS:**

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has postponed a planned meeting with officials of Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company on Friday, June 6 to discuss cable separation issues at the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station. No new date has been set.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
#### UNITED SAVINGS ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS, petitioner, v. TIMBERS OF INWOOD FOREST ASSOCIATES, INC.

No. 86-1602.

Supreme Court of the United States.

Oct. 19, 1987.

The motion of Global Marine, Inc. for leave to participate in oral argument as *amicus curiae,*for divided argument and for additional time for oral argument is denied.
No. 90-1859.

#### Keeney, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary *v.*Tamayo-Reyes.

C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, *ante,*p. 807.] Motion of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation for leave to file a brief as *amicus curiae*granted.
10/28/2015

CAVITT, DONALD RAY JR

N3B 793IS

OFPi'Q!AO.xSi3^iVG^SSOL STAT10N-^Ay^JMAS, ,7I7i}

STATE OF TEXAS

PENALTY FOR ^S^n^

PRIVATE USE df&2frF<Z

U.S. POSTAGE»PITNEY BOWES

J*

M/,3$il '"ft.

w„ pce|g^i|o-K This Court has previously entergdHan^ order" citing you for abuse of the writ of

habeas corpus. The applicationtor^/n^Mabeas corpus filed by you in the 27th

District Court, received by this CourToTOednesday, October 14, 2015, does not

satisfy the requirements for consideration set out in the order described above.

Therefore, the Court will take no action on this writ. „ Abel AcostarClerKv\

ZIP 78701

02 m

00014016030CT 29 2015

WR-32,756-12

R F.P

DONALD RAY CAVITT JR.

MTC - WEST TEXAS ISF - TDC # 1888682

P:0. BOX 1359

brownfield, tx 79316

i'1i'mII',HIi''i'''IiII|I|i'^iIm'MI''Ii'ii'iII''i,'Iii''II'
Issue Date: 10/01/78 - 1 - 9900 STS 3.0 Tolerances

NRC INSPECTION MANUAL

PART 9900: TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

STS30T.TG

STANDARD TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

SECTION 3.0 ACCEPTABLE MEASUREMENT TOLERANCES FOR

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION LIMITS

A. PURPOSE

To provide guidance to the IE inspectors regarding acceptable

measurement tolerances for Technical Specification limits.

B. DISCUSSION

Numerical parameter limits are identified in the Technical

Specifications of a nuclear facility. Questions regarding

acceptable measurement tolerances for the parameter limits have

occasionally been received from inspectors. The NRC position

regarding acceptable measurement tolerances for Technical Specification parameter limits is as follows:

The TS limits are established with allowance for measurement

tolerances already incorporated. The limits take into consideration measurement uncertainties as necessary to assure safe plant

operation. The stated limit presupposes that the licensees have

tolerances consistent with normal industry standards (e.g., ASTM,

IEEE, ACI, etc.).

For example, assume the TS limit for the boron concentration in an

accumulator is  1900 ppm. Assume an accumulator solution sample

measurement was performed in accordance with Monitor Potentiometric

Procedure D3032, resulting in a measured value of 1910 ppm. The

1910 ppm measurement would be considered acceptable because the TS

limit of 1900 ppm was determined allowing for measurement tolerances. (The tolerance of this measurement is ± 2.4% according to

ASTM, Part 31, D302-74).

C. REFERENCES

Memorandum, D. L. Caphton to J. H. Sniezek dtd 1/24/78.

Memorandum, J. I. Riesland to D. L. Caphton dtd 3/13/78.

Discussion between J. M. McGough and J. I. Riesland on 3/6/78.
9900 STS 3.0 Tolerances - 2 - Issue Date: 10/01/78

END
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Indonesia, United States, and Partner Nations Ready for Super Garuda Shield 2022 

U.S. Embassy & Consulates in Indonesia

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More
#### Town of Hamlin, Respondent, v Brain J. Convery et al., Appellants.

[632 NYS2d 998]

Motion to strike from appellants’ brief denied. Memorandum: The pleadings of the prior proceeding involving the parties are properly in the record, and Supreme Court incorporated by reference its prior decision *884into the decision and order now on appeal. Thus, the objected to portions of defendants’ brief are not dehors the record. Whether the arguments raised in defendants’ brief are properly preserved is an issue for consideration upon the argument of the appeal. Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Balio and Boehm, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 11 
                                      
                          THERMACELL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

                     Computation of Earnings Per Common Share


                                                 For the Three Months Ended
                                                 --------------------------
                                                 February 28,  February 29,
                                                    1997          1996     
                                                 ------------  ----------- 
Shares outstanding:                                 869,899        726,672 
Weighted average shares outstanding                 869,899        697,072 
Net loss                                          $(186,912)     $(126,170)
                                                  ---------      --------- 
                                                  ---------      --------- 

Net loss per share                                $   (0.21)     $   (0.18)
No. 82-5721.

#### Sharrieff *v.*Hilton, Superintendent, New Jersey State Prison, et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                        11376609
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                        11227381
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   71187470
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        10501128
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          10523853
<LOANS>                                      551858140
<ALLOWANCE>                                    4517922
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               683136852
<DEPOSITS>                                   537499728
<SHORT-TERM>                                  36890000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           11018468
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       8559047
<OTHER-SE>                                    89169609
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               683136852
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               21351456
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              2958484
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              24309940
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                            11974685
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            12625789
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         11684151
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    80000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              187255
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                6546993
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                6431647
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     6431647
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   4237156
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.49
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.68
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                    254364
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               3956150
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              4517922
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           1050000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        3467922


</TABLE>
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2010 to 12/31/2010Page 1 of 103/16/2015 16:02:54

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Millstone 3 Docket (050- 00423)

Communication / IR160 - No communication / information not communicated O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 160 - No communication / information not communicated L - Licensing / regulatory affairs A - Administrative 

217

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Human-System Interface & Environmnt / IR170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA I - Instrumentation & Control O - Control Room Ops 

18

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Procedures & Reference Document / IR111 - Procedure / reference document technical content M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

18

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Problem Identification & Resolution / IR142 - Operating experience (OE) review LTA O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 148 - Action not yet started or untimely O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 

217

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Work Planning & Practices / IR182 - Work package quality LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 183 - Pre-job activities LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 185 - Procedural adherence LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements L - Licensing / regulatory affairs A - Administrative 

190 - Failure to stop work / non-conservative decision making O - Control Room Ops 

O - Operations

650

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Total Items for this Docket: 12
STRUCTURE ACTIVITY TEAM REPORT 

CASE NUMBER: P08-0512

RELATED CASES: 

CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSIONS 

TYPE OF CONCERN: HEALTH ECOTOX 

LEVEL OF CONCERN: 1 3 

KEYWORDS: 

AQUATOX-C 

SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT 

FATE: 

VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 EC (E) 

 

POTW removal (%) = 50-90 via sorption and biodeg 

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk 

Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong 

PBT Potential: P 

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl 

 

HEALTH: Absorption of the low molecular weight fraction 

( ) is poor all routes based on 

physical/chemical properties. No significant health 

concerns. 

, but the SAT members could not see how that is 

possible for the PMN material so the concern expressed for 

irritation in the past (SAT meeting on 7/15/08) based on the 

pH is no longer supported. 

*CEB HEALTH: Low concern (No exposures needed). XB: No 

testing desired. 

ECOTOX: Predicted (P) and measured (M) toxicity values in 

mg/L (ppm) are: 

fish 96-h LC50 = * P 

daphnid 48-h LC50 = * P 

green algal 96-h EC50 = * P 

fish chronic value = 0.001 P 

daphnid ChV = 0.003 P 

algal ChV = 0.010 P 

Predictions are based on SARs for neutral organic chemicals; 

SAR chemical class =
); 

effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients 

and nominal concentrations; DW hardness <150.0 mg/L as 

CaCO3; and 

high concern for chronic toxicity only; 

assessment factor = 

 

Becky Jones 564-8919
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C.§1350), John P. McLaughlin, Chief Executive Officer of Anesiva, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge, as follows:**

The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007, to which this Certification is attached asExhibit 32.1 (the “***Annual Report***”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the AnnualReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of this 14th day of March 2008. 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), has been provided to Anesiva, Inc. and will be retained by Anesiva, Inc. and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing ofAnesiva, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in suchfiling.