alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 17, 2016

No. 04-16-00724-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF R.S.-T., A CHILD,

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-2048-CV

Honorable W.C. Kirkendall, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On October 13, 2016, the trial court signed an order terminating Appellant’s rights to her

child R.S.T. On October 18, 2016, Appellant filed a notice of accelerated appeal. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 26.1(b). The reporter’s record was due on October 28, 2016. See id. R. 35.1(b). 

On November 14, 2016, court reporter Lori Schmid filed a notification of late reporter’s 

record. She indicated she has a large backlog of records and she needs more time to prepare the 

record in this appeal.

The reporter’s motion for extension of time to file the reporter’s record is GRANTED. 

The reporter’s record must be filed with this court by November 28, 2016. See id. R. 35.3(c) 

(limiting an extension in an accelerated appeal to ten days). 

The child’s “need for permanence is the paramount consideration for the child’s present 

and future physical and emotional needs.” See Dupree v. Tex. Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory 

Servs., 907 S.W.2d 81, 87 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1995, no writ). This court must render its 

decision “with the least possible delay,” and any further delays in obtaining the reporter’s record 

will hinder this court in its duty. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(c); In re J.L., 163 S.W.3d 79, 82 (Tex. 

2005) (quoting TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(a) (West 2014)). Any further requests for 

extension of time to file the reporter’s record will be strongly disfavored. 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 17th day of November, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.1


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Ortec
International, Inc. ("Ortec"), hereby certifies that Ortec's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 (the "Annual Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Ortec.

Dated: April 14, 2003


/s/ Steven Katz
----------------------------------------
Steven Katz
Chairman and Principal Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2299 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2299

To modify the age requirement for the Student Incentive Payment Program 
                    of the State maritime academies.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 24, 2021

 Mr. Peters (for himself, Mr. Young, Mr. Cruz, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Braun, 
and Mr. Markey) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To modify the age requirement for the Student Incentive Payment Program 
                    of the State maritime academies.

    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 ``Changing Age-Determined Eligibility 
To Student Incentive Payments Act'' or the ``CADETS Act''.

SEC. 2. AGE REQUIREMENT FOR THE STUDENT INCENTIVE PAYMENT PROGRAM OF 
              THE STATE MARITIME ACADEMIES.

    Section 51509 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(i) Age Requirement.--The Secretary may make an agreement under 
this section only with a qualified student who will meet the age 
requirement for enlistment in the Navy Reserve at the time of 
graduation from the academy.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 24.1



                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



         KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby
constitutes and appoints each of Barry F. Schwartz, Robert K. Kretzman and
Michael T. Sheehan or any of them, each acting alone, his true and lawful
attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution, for him and his
name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with the REVLON
CONSUMER PRODUCTS CORPORATION (the "Corporation") Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2002 (the "Form 10-K") under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, including, without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in the name and on behalf of the Corporation or
on behalf of the undersigned as a director or officer of the Corporation, and
any amendments to the Form 10-K and any instrument, contract, document or other
writing, of or in connection with the Form 10-K or amendments thereto, and to
file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection
therewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission and any applicable securities exchange or securities self-regulatory
body, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, full
power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and
necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and
purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed these presents this 27th
day of March, 2003.



                                                     /s/ Ronald O. Perelman
                                                     ------------------------
                                                         RONALD O. PERELMAN
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                        1,459,725
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 69,836,303
<ALLOWANCES>                  1,344,938
<INVENTORY>                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              0
<PP&E>                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                69,964,506
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         0
<BONDS>                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         16,737,153
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      0
<OTHER-SE>                    53,227,353
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  69,964,506
<SALES>                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              6,348,819
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 793,476
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>              375,579
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            892,303
<INCOME-PRETAX>               4,287,461
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           4,287,461
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  4,287,461
<EPS-BASIC>                   .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                 .00


</TABLE>
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 Air T, Inc. (the "Company") Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Walter
Clark, Chief Executive Officer, and John Parry, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.











Date:  November
2, 2009











/s/ Walter
Clark


Walter
Clark


Chief
Executive Officer














/s/ John
Parry


John
Parry


Chief
Financial Officer
·.IN.IUPl.Y 

·RllPBRTO 

REF ID:A39498 '1 ... "'("~ •• 

·=·a ',., 

MEMORANDUM FOR: 

~· 

WAR DEPARl'MENT • 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SIGNAL OFFICER 8 

WMHINGTON 

• - • ~ -~----- -~ ·"""""!· -.II'!!·~-

April 19, 19.35 

Major Akin. 

1. Under date of November 151 19331 I forwarded a memorandum, 

drawing, and draft specificatioJJ,s covering a cipher device on which 

I desired a patent application be drawn. The papers are attached 

hereto. 

2. This device presents excellent possibilities for a commercial 

de'Yice for banking ~poses in c~nnectio.Dwith authentication of money 

transfers by cable. An opportunity has recently presented itself for 

dispGsing of my commercial rights to this invention, the government 

retaining license and eh.op rights as uaual. 

,3. It is requested that permission be granted to enter into 

negotiations with a proppective purcb,p.ser of these commercial rights. 

Attached:: 

File on case. 

pproved for Release by NSA on 10-09-2013 pursuant to E,.O~ , 13526 - . 

, • - ~ • • -~ JI, ..... .....:..· .. ~L. d
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 40414 Summary Calendar

**Matthew Roppolo, et al**

**.**
Plaintiffs **,** versus

**Medical Director Lannette Linthicum; Texas**  **Department of Criminal Justice; Ben Raimer; Cynthia Jumper; Rodney Burrow; F. Parker Hudson III; Erin**  **Wyrick; John Burruss; Preston Johnson, Jr.; Kelly Garcia; Owen Murray; University of Texas Medical**  **Branch Correctional Managed Care; Dee Budgewater;**  **Philip Keiser,**

Defendants

— Appellees **,**

versus

**Julian Dominguez,**

Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:19

- CV

- 262

Before **Stewart, Duncan,**  and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**.** United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 5, 2022
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-40414 Document: 00516422036 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/05/2022No. 21

- 40414

2 **Per Curiam :**  *
Julian Dominguez, former Texas prisoner # 497927 , is a class member in a class action alleging that inmates received inadequate medical treatment while in state custody. He now appeals the district court’s approval of the
class

- action settlement. He has also filed a motion for the appointment of counsel on appeal, or, in the alternative, for a stay of the appeal until he is able to hire an attorney. Because Dominguez has not demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel, we deny his request. Ulmer v. Chancellor , 691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982 )

. We also deny his alter native motion to stay the appeal.

We review a district court’s approval of a class

- action settlement for
abuse of discretion. See Ayers v. Thompson , 358 F.3d 356, 368 (5th Cir. 2004). Dominguez has not presented any argument that the district court’s r uling
was an abuse of discretion. He has therefore abandoned, by failure to brief, any challenge to the approval of the settlement. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d
222, 22 4

- 2 5 (5th Cir. 1993); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).
The district court’s judgment is **AFFIRMED** , and Dominguez’s
motions are **DENIED**

.

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. Case: 21-40414 Document: 00516422036 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/05/2022
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

KEITH A. SMITH,

Petitioner

v.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 134 EM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 5th day of February, 2020, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the “Writ of Mandamas [sic] to Compel” is DENIED.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Iteris, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Abbas Mohaddes, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ ABBAS  MOHADDES |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   | Abbas  Mohaddes          |
|   | Chief  Executive Officer |
|   |                     |
|   | July 27,  2010      |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or any other documentauthenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appearsin typed form within the electronic version of this written statement requiredby Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2070 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2070

To clarify that noncommercial species found entirely within the borders 
    of a single State are not in interstate commerce or subject to 
   regulation under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 or any other 
  provision of law enacted as an exercise of the power of Congress to 
                     regulate interstate commerce.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 15, 2021

 Mr. Lee (for himself, Mr. Paul, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Cruz) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
                    on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To clarify that noncommercial species found entirely within the borders 
    of a single State are not in interstate commerce or subject to 
   regulation under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 or any other 
  provision of law enacted as an exercise of the power of Congress to 
                     regulate interstate commerce.

    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 ``Native Species Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF INTRASTATE SPECIES.

    (a) Definition of Intrastate Species.--In this Act, the term 
``intrastate species'' means any species of plant or fish or wildlife 
(as those terms are defined in section 3 of the Endangered Species Act 
of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1532)) that is--
            (1) found entirely within the borders of a single State; 
        and
            (2) not part of a national market for any commodity.
    (b) Treatment.--An intrastate species shall not be--
            (1) considered to be in interstate commerce; and
            (2) subject to regulation under--
                    (A) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 
                1531 et seq.); or
                    (B) any other provision of law under which 
                regulatory authority is based on the power of Congress 
                to regulate interstate commerce as enumerated in 
                article I, section 8, clause 3 of the Constitution of 
                the United States.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6388

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

ANGELO GALLOWAY, a/k/a Gelo,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (2:10-cr-00096-MSD-TEM-2; 2:11-cv-00462-MSD)

Submitted: June 30, 2014 Decided: July 28, 2014

Before SHEDD and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Angelo Galloway, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, 

Benjamin L. Hatch, Assistant United States Attorneys, Norfolk, 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Angelo Galloway seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Galloway has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 

We deny Galloway’s motions to expedite, for bond, and for in 

camera review of grand jury transcripts. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       5,760,342
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,047,536
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 13,579,286
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            32,912,635
<PP&E>                                     101,833,373
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             145,229,936
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,306,365
<BONDS>                                     68,010,338
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        6,881,684
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,207
<OTHER-SE>                                  27,868,430
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               145,229,936
<SALES>                                     39,887,348
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            77,143,660
<CGS>                                       28,582,699
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               64,501,366
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,947,209
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,036,390
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,570,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,466,300
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (65,241)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,401,149
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.44
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.1



                      Consent of Ernst & Young LLP


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report on Form 
10-K of GalaGen Inc. of our report dated January 22, 1999, included in the 
1998 Annual Report to Shareholders of GalaGen Inc.

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of GalaGen Inc. 
listed in Item 14(a).  This schedule is the responsibility of the Company's 
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits.  
In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when 
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, 
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements 
on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-05415, 333-05417, 333-27031 and 333-33357) pertaining 
to the GalaGen Inc. 1992 Stock Plan, Employee Stock Purchase Plan, 
Non-Statutory Stock Option Agreements and 1997 Incentive Plan and in the 
Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-71883, 333-64489 and 333-41551) 
of GalaGen Inc. and in the related Prospectus of our report dated January 22, 
1999, with respect to the financial statements of GalaGen Inc. incorporated 
by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 
31, 1998 and the related financial statement schedule included herein, filed 
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                       Ernst & Young LLP


Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 25, 1999




                                       27