alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NUMBER 13-13-00712-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

FRANCISCO JAVIER LEAL, Appellant,

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 332nd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Garza, Perkes, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

Appellant, Francisco Javier Leal, filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his 

conviction in trial court cause number CR-2418-13-F. Appellant’s brief was due on 

January 27, 2014. Appellant’s counsel was notified of the briefing schedule, but no brief 

has been filed and no other activity has occurred in this appeal.

Accordingly, we now ABATE this appeal and REMAND the cause to the trial court 

for further proceedings pursuant to Rule 38.8(b)(2) and (3) of the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to make 
2

appropriate findings and recommendations concerning the following: (1) whether 

appellant desires to prosecute this appeal; (2) why appellant's counsel has failed to file a 

brief and whether counsel has effectively abandoned the appeal; (3) whether appellant 

has been denied effective assistance of counsel; (4) whether appellant's counsel should 

be removed; and (5) whether appellant is indigent and entitled to court-appointed counsel.

If the trial court determines that appellant does want to continue the appeal, that 

present counsel should be removed, and that appellant is indigent and entitled to 

court-appointed counsel, the trial court shall appoint new counsel to represent appellant 

in this appeal. If new counsel is appointed, the name, address, email address, telephone 

number, and state bar number of said counsel shall be included in an order appointing 

counsel.

The trial court shall cause its findings and recommendations, together with any 

orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues, to be included in a supplemental 

clerk's record. Furthermore, the trial court shall cause a supplemental reporter's record 

of any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental clerk's record and supplemental 

reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the 

expiration of thirty days from the date of this order.

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

16th day of November, 2016.
**Exhibit 99.1**

Corel Corporation

Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Years Ended November 30, 2000, 1999 and 1998****

Included in accounts receivable are the following reserves and related activity:****

|Year Ended        | Description                     | Opening
Balance | Additions             | Deductions | Ending Balance
|----------------- | ------------------------------- | --------------- | --------------------- | ---------- | --------------
|                  |                                 |                 | (In thousands of
US$) |           
|November 30,
2000 | Promotional
rebates             | $3,277          | $17,433               | $18,093    | $2,617        
|                  | Sales reserve                   | 40,929          | 8,210                 | 30,351     | 18,788        
|                  | Allowance for
doubtful
accounts | 6,720           | 3,696                 | 2,210      | 8,206         
|                  |                                 |                 |                       |            |               
|November 30,
1999 | Promotional
rebates             | 6,197           | 8,208                 | 11,128     | 3,277         
|                  | Sales reserve                   | 21,882          | 55,309                | 36,262     | 40,929        
|                  | Allowance for
doubtful
accounts | 6,804           | 28                    | 112        | 6,720         
|                  |                                 |                 |                       |            |               
|November 30,
1998 | Promotional
rebates             | 11,396          | 25,959                | 31,158     | 6,197         
|                  | Sales reserve                   | 54,413          | 58,367                | 90,898     | 21,882        
|                  | Allowance for
doubtful
accounts | 5,466           | 1,704                 | 366        | 6,804
/ 

/ REF ID:A67736 • 

l'.ugu.at 6,. 1936. 

· KemorBDdull ::'or Mr. r:11u.ao r. Friedman. and ltr. Prank B. Rowlett. 

Office ot the Cblet Signal Officer, 

W. P. and "~• Dlvie ton. 

Subject: lfew P&ta'lt AJt>licat ton. S1stea for Randamlstng the Relo.tiona 

of ilectrical Cir.cu1\a 

' 1. The uocuneuts in tbs mt ler of 1our p!'t)poee4 patent appli• 

cation. abo"8 identified. ha'ftt been completed &nd are sulftitted tor 7our 

t.1.pp!"OY!t.l 1-\llU 9:taC".ition prior ~o the filing or the &p°!)U.ca.tinn in the Patent 

Office. ' -

2. !~ execu.ti~ t: e ~tJpli<.'A.i.!on, plear.e be sure to a!gn 70ur 

zat111a1 11\ tltne -place• and in each instance. the tlret name 1m1s\ be eignad 

in full.. <.'b.~ v!:.1'1.l ~fl'i.lf:t 1.!t:- 1).1."'kn.or.lecteed 'betora a not&l'1 public •ho an 

also eign and impress his nGtarial seal. 

'fn exec;itiDg the license each of .r.:>'!.i. J",;i=.tl(.1'.Sft l!ht.>•l.l.d sie-n 

in· one -pi~ea a.a 111d.:!.c1.:.t~d snd t:Jo fil"f.lt r..a:ie !IN.rt b~ ei~e4 in ~l in 

•aeh inAtance. Two per•ons muet alao sign ae •linessea. 

3. When thesJ 4oc'Qmllnte b&'N been execute:l. pler..ae return to 

thia office w.norei:.:po~ the a~~lic~tiou will be ~laced in order and 4ul.7 

f 1le4 1n the P&tent Otfice. 

Charlo1 A. llowe. 

Patent.a Sect10l'. ~if'J'..a.l Co:z-P•• 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 09-06-2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
JumboSports Inc. and subsidiaries on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-45041 and
333-45043) of our report dated April 10, 1998, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements of JumboSports Inc. and subsidiaries as of
January 31, 1997 and January 30, 1998 and for the years ended January 31, 1997
and January 30, 1998, which report is included in this annual Report on
Form 10-K.

COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Tampa, Florida
April 24, 1998
' 

rn:~414ss4s 

1 Jeclassified and approved " for release by t' ,._______ F · ·-~ '2-7 (),.J.,l~s\) , · 

·. ~s on 11-17-2014 pursuant to E. 0. ~ ·Ar-&bt I lf . U · 
EO 3.3(h)(2) 

REF ID:A4148845 PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 
EO 3.3(h)(2) 

REF ID:A4148845 PL 86-36/50 USC 3605
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Michael Charles Pilot,

Plaintiff,

v.

State of Michigan, et al.,

Defendants.

Civil Action No. 16-1805 (RDM)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This case is before the Court on petitioner Michael Charles Pilot’s petition for a writ of 

habeas corpus, Dkt. 1, and motion for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9, Dkt. 3. As 

an initial matter, however, the Court must determine whether it has jurisdiction. See, e.g., Doe 

ex rel. Fein v. District of Columbia, 93 F.3d 861, 871 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (“A claim that the court 

lacks jurisdiction under Article III of the Constitution may not be waived, since the jurisdiction 

at issue goes to the court’s power to resolve a case, and the court is obliged to address is sua 

sponte.”) A federal court lacks jurisdiction over a suit when the claims at issue are “wholly 

insubstantial and frivolous.” Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682–83 (1946); Agudas Chasidei 

Chabad of U.S. v. Russian Federation, 528 F.3d 934, 940 (D.C. Cir. 2008). As explained in an 

apparently similar case that petitioner brought in the federal District Court for the Eastern 

District of Michigan last year, “[f]ederal courts are without power to entertain claims otherwise 

within their jurisdiction if they are ‘so attenuated and insubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of 

merit.’” Pilot v. Snyder, No. 15-10961, slip op. at 5 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 30, 2015) (quoting 

Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U.S. 561, 579 (1904)).
2

The Court has carefully reviewed petitioner’s extensive filings in this case, and 

concludes—as did the district court in Pilot v. Snyder, No. 15-10961, slip op. at 5—that they do 

not present a coherent claim for relief sufficient to sustain federal jurisdiction under the rule

announced in Bell v. Hood. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss this case sua sponte pursuant to 

Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A separate order will issue.

 /s/ Randolph D. Moss 

 RANDOLPH D. MOSS 

 United States District Judge

Date: November 18, 2016
NSA OPERATIOI~ ORDER 

NUMBER 213 (Change 3) 

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY 

Washington 25, D. c. iq July 55 

CAUCELLED WHEN CHANGE HAS BEEN ENTERED IN BASIC OPEEATIONS ORDER 

Section IV, paragraphs 7a and 7b: Add SSO, PACAF and SSR, CINCPAC 

as end-product recipients. 

BY COMMAND OF LIEUTENANT GENmAL CANINE: 

OFFICIAL: 

ALFRED R. MARCY 

Colonel, US Army 

Deputy Director 

fi.J. &:~ .c.,,;_~ Major WAC 

Actg Ass·t Adj Gen 

DIS'mIBUTION 

SpeciaJ. 

Hl'tNBLEI 'TIA eeMIM'f eI~ OMJY 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 01-16-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352\3 

CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit 12
<TABLE>
                          Fleming Companies, Inc.   
            Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges        
<CAPTION>
                                                   40 Weeks Ended
                                               October 5,    October 7,
(In thousands of dollars)                        1996          1995  
-------------------------                      ----------    ----------
<S>                                            <C>           <C>
Earnings:
  Pretax income                                $ 33,464      $ 77,612
  Fixed charges, net                            159,185       164,536
                                               --------      --------

           Total earnings                      $192,649      $242,148
                                               ========      ========
Fixed charges:
  Interest expense                             $125,045      $135,046
  Portion of rental charges
     deemed to be interest                       33,861        29,239
  Capitalized interest                              103           664
                                               --------      --------

           Total fixed charges                 $159,009      $164,949
                                               ========      ========
Ratio of earnings
   to fixed charges                                1.21          1.47
                                               ========      ========
</TABLE>

"Earnings" consists of income before income taxes and fixed charges excluding
capitalized interest.  Capitalized interest amortized during the respective
periods is added back to earnings.

"Fixed charges, net" consists of interest expense, an estimated amount of
rental expense which is deemed to be representative of the interest factor and
amortization of capitalized interest.

The pro forma ratio of earnings to fixed charges is omitted as it is not
applicable.
NUMBERS 13-20-00064-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

JOSE ROBERTO VELIZ, Appellant, 

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 63rd District Court

of Val Verde County, Texas.

ORDER ABATING APPEAL

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa

Order Per Curiam

The Court received a letter from court reporter Lisa A. Traslavina indicating she 

was not the official court reporter for the trial court for the entire pendency of this case. 

Additionally, this Court was informed the original official court reporter assigned to the 

trial court is retired and a record has not been requested from him/her. 
2

This sequence of events requires us to effectuate our responsibility to avoid further 

delay and to preserve the parties' rights. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(a)(1). Accordingly, 

this appeal is ABATED and the cause REMANDED to the trial court. 

In accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(f)(4), the trial court is 

directed to conduct a hearing to determine if: (1) the appellant has timely requested a 

reporter's record; (2) without the appellant's fault, a significant exhibit or a significant 

portion of the court reporter's notes and records has been lost or destroyed or - if the 

proceedings were electronically recorded - a significant portion of the recording has been 

lost or destroyed or is inaudible; (3) if the lost, destroyed, or inaudible portion of the 

reporter's record, or the lost and destroyed exhibit, is necessary to the appeal's resolution; 

and (4) the lost, destroyed, or inaudible portion of the reporter's record cannot be replaced 

by agreement of the parties, or the lost or destroyed exhibit cannot be replaced either by 

agreement of the parties or with a copy determined by the trial court to accurately 

duplicate with reasonable certainty the original exhibit. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(f).

The trial court is directed to forward the record of the proceedings, including any 

orders and findings, to this Court within sixty (60) days of the date of this order, or to notify 

this Court within such period indicating a date by which the trial court can comply.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

TEX R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

6th day of April, 2020.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

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



I, Charles E. Bradley, Jr., certify that:

|   |                                                                                                                                                                   
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment to our Annual Report on Form 10-K
    for     the     fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 of Consumer Portfolio Services, Inc.; and

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









Date: April 30, 2018

|
|
|
|
|
|
...,...4:;:;,. • .,μ; ... ,waz.1 ... 1 ~eta«-•• . : 

aitor 

loientitio .ber1oan 

I V.at Ji.5th Street 

1ev Tork 361 lfn tork 

~lb-1 

REF ID:A62356 

310 &eacmd Street, s.1. 

V..hfnston 3, n .e. 

' .A.upat 1955 

% h&Te thi'ee thinp in llin4 a\out vhich to write JOU• 

lint, t wau14 like to ecq11-nt ;rau &D4 Jour •taf.f' on ti. 

attllenoe of the h•ue fQr Avguat 1955. lath rq wi.t. ml I nad 

&nil en.1ore4 pn.etioall.J nay article in it. 

haon4, I want to thank 'tfhoner took aueh P1'\141t aan of 11¥ 

fttliilt tor a ~t of tbe 111.1 19S5 haw whioh wa l.oet 

b ti-anait \7 the :ro.t Office De,.ri:mnt. 

~I ! thoucht ;rou aicbt \e inten•ted. in the to11ov1na 

atraet vh1Ch Qpe!U'll .. the flnt ~ of the Preface to The 

Co14en Aem of Patent•& .l hro47 on'Yanb. Xnftntiwne•• -a,. V.11eoe 

r;l~ P\1hli•he4 ta sew !on \1 rr.4eriait A. ltoba a:o4 :hotber in 

"Patent• ,.._ cloubtl.a1• unknown in pnb.iltoric tiae1, 

tor•-~ ·aoo4 l'W.8on to •v.wo .. tmt tbe tint .. not 

U.-4 until the -41anal. en of Gcm.J1aCO tba kld.1 when ~ Vt.,yotlald1 a :Rwl•ian tl'lftlltor1 obtained a oa'fttat on a 

'new ~ tOr coznbJnp :re 1.okke• • (a ~ tor vbat 1a 

MV b.ovn .. :pa:rtiq the lair) • " 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 06-16-2014 pursuant to E.O. 1352e 

-!J!I 

... 

\ -· 

\ 

\
!;\ REF ID:A70959 

Report ot -cmtacta o.ta14e e~ Secv1 t:r )i'vtaJon 

'l'O: Plana encl ~rations -- Date 3 Feb 47 

I a : i ! ,. ' 

I > 

: i' 1 J ! ra I 3 d 1&$¥5 t : 12 r •: I: 815 a ;s I 

Orpn1zat101'l visited: Dept of Interior, Bureau of Standards~,,,. National. Wooden Box A~sociation 

Peracm.( a) contacted: Kr. Braithwate 

Mr. Frat le B. Kimball 

Subject(s) discussed: Packing material for cushioning metal barriers as 

relates to Project for Storing and Packing Cryptographic Machines. 

:Results r4 d1acuas1cm 1.ncludmg ... t.tm1A1ia IE..ie: Mr. Braithwate of the 

Department of Interior, Bureau of Standards was co~tacted with reference to 

packing material to use for cushion between the metal barrier and the wooden 

box. His best recommendation was for the use of Kim Pak "With a water repellent 

backing. His experience was not very extensive in the cushio;d.ing field and he 

referred me to Mr. Frank B. Kimball, -chief Engineer, National Y".10oden Box 

Association. The problem was discussed ld.th Mr. Kimball and he recommended 

the use of Kim Pak very highly, to give the cushioning we desire. A second 

reconmendation was offered in the use of excelsior pads for top and bottom 

of the box, the sides and ends being packed with loese excelsior after the 

barrier was in place. This latter process would entail more time in padding the 

box since the excelsior would have to be tamped in by hand. It would also 

offer the possibility that an equal amount of pressure m8J1 not be present on 

all sides, therefore placing stress on the barrier wtrl.ch might open the seams 

or cause lmdue shifting of the barrier. This unequal pressure would also 

affect the indi vi.dual boards on the ds.ides of the wooden box and could cause 

one board to take the entire "Weight of the equipment in the event the container 

were lifted with all weight on one side. It. was Mr. Kimbal 1 1 s iJhought that 

the Kim Pak would be about 25% more expensive than excelsior but that the 

additional protection and saving.in packing time afforded would"'lrarrant it's use. 

ltecomendat1c:m lflJ.d/or action taken: 

curtailed 

Recommend th&.t planning en the use of excelsior be/wwm.,.•• and that 

planning proceed with the premise that Kim Pak will be used for cushioning. 

SIS-SC J'Ol'll Bo. 1475 

(Rn) 15 Mar 45 

Branch ·sectiea' ·.. ._ 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 06-03-2014 pursuantto E.O. 13528 

. ~ ~<.f7
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Cathay Merchant
Group, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
of the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as 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.

Dated May 15, 2007

| | By: | /s/ Michael J. Smith       
| | --- | ---------------------------
| |     | Michael J.
  Smith         
| |     | Chief Executive Officer and
| |     | Chief Financial Officer    

---
IN REPLY 

RE:FERTO 

REF ID:A521673 

WAR DEPARTMENT 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SIGNAL OFFICER 

WASHINGTON 

April 6, 1937. 

Memorandum For Mr. V:illiem F. Friedman, 

CrYrtanalyat, 

War Plans and TrR1n1ng Division, 

Office of the Chief Signal Officer. 

Subject: Patent Application, Serial No. 107,2.44 - Cryptographs 

Improvement on Patent Application, Ser. No~ 682,096 

1. This will report the first official action of" the 

.Patent Office Examiner in the above case. A copy of the official 

letter dated March 6, 1937, is t:-ansmi tted herewith acco:r.ipanied 

by printed copies o~ the ~our U.S. patents cited as references. 

2. In one of the patents to Damm cited by the Examiner, 

there is an obvious-error in referring to the year 1927, since the 

patent in question is a 1922 patent. In the 1925 patent the elements 

mentioned by the Examiner will be found in Figs. 2 and 3, while in 

the 1922 patent the elements he mentions will be found in l!'ig. 4. 

3. The usual period of six months from the date of the 

official action is available in which to present a formal response. 

Thus the time for replying in this instance will expire September 8, 

next. Meanwhile, this section will be glad to ba.ve the benefit of 

your coII!IflBnts end suggestions to assist in the preparation of an 

appropriate amendment and argument in good season. 

Encl. 

Charles A. Rowe, 

Patents Section, Signal Corps 

JA'pproved for Release by NSA on 11-22-2013 pursuant to E.O. 1352§
### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 09 -0 00 82 -C V

______________________________ L ESL I E L EE B ROWN, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appea l from the 336th J udicial District Court

Fa nnin County , Texas Trial Court No. 22760

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C
. J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Me mor and

um O pin ion

by Chi e f Jus tic e Mo rr iss2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON L e sli e L e e B ro wn

ha s f ile d a no tic e of a pp e a l f ro m an o rd e r that dir e c te d th e inm ate tr us t
acc ount of this indigent def endant to be g arnished unde r the a u t h o ri t y o f S ection 501.014 of the Texas Governme nt Code. SeeT EX . G OV ' T C ODE ANN . § 501.014 (Ve rnon 2004). In o rd e r t o p e rf

e c t an a pp e a l to thi s Co ur

t f ro m th e Ap ri l 9, 20 09 , o rd e r o f g arn ishme nt, Br own was r equire d to file a notice of appea l w ithin thirty day s of that date, on or bef ore Ma y 11, 2009. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 26.1. The rule also provides a fiftee n-day

g rac e period, which would have expired May

26, 2009. This notice of a ppeal wa s filed August 26, 2009. It is unti mely , and ca nnot
se rv e to i nv ok e the jur isd ic tio n o f t his Court . We have no jurisdiction over this appeal. The re be ing no timely notice of a

ppeal f rom the g arnishment, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

J o s hR
. M o r

r i s s , III Chief J ustice Date Submitted: September 8, 2009 Date D ecide d: September 9, 2009
96-2455.

#### State v. Keene.

Montgomery App. No. 14375. On June 18, 1998, this court stayed the execution of sentence in this cause pending exhaustion of state post-conviction remedies. It appearing to the court that this court dismissed the appeal in ease No. 99-517, appellant’s post-conviction appeal, on June 2, 1999,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, *sua sponte,*that the stay of execution entered in this cause on June 18,1998, be and is hereby revoked.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by this court that said sentence be carried into execution by the Warden of the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility or, in his absence, by the Deputy Warden on Monday, the 20th day of September 1999, in accordance with the statutes so provided.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certified copy of this entry and a warrant under the seal of this court be duly certified to the Warden of the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility and that said Warden shall make due return thereof to the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County.