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

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-15-00423-CR 

IN RE DANIEL LEE AINSWORTH, RELATOR 

 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING 

 

November 20, 2015 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. 

Relator Daniel Lee Ainsworth is a prison inmate appearing pro se. In this original 

proceeding he asks that we issue a writ of mandamus against respondents, the 

Honorable Don R. Emerson, judge of the 320th District Court of Potter County, and the 

Honorable W.F. (Corky) Roberts, judge of the Potter County Court at Law Number One. 

While not clearly stated, relator may also seek relief against Caroline Woodburn, Potter 

County District Clerk, and Julie Smith, Potter County Clerk.

Relator’s petition does not comply with appellate rule 52.3. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3. 

For this reason alone any relief requested against Judge Emerson and Judge Roberts is 

denied. In re Bibbs, 07-11-00393-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 8192 (Tex. App.—
2

Amarillo Oct. 13, 2011, orig. proceeding) (denying petition for mandamus for 

noncompliance with appellate rule 52.3). Relator presents nothing indicating relief by 

mandamus against the district clerk and county clerk is necessary to enforce our

jurisdiction.1 See In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, 

orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (explaining district clerk is not within the mandamus 

jurisdiction of court of appeals unless it is shown issuance of writ of mandamus against 

clerk is necessary to enforce court of appeals’ jurisdiction). Accordingly, any relief 

relator seeks against Ms. Woodburn and Ms. Smith is dismissed for want of subject 

matter jurisdiction. 

Per Curiam

Do not publish.

 

 

1 Relator has causes pending in this court. Ex parte Ainsworth, Nos. 07-15-

00091-CR; 07-15-00106-CR & 07-15-00107-CR and Ainsworth v. State Nos. 07-15-

00205-CR, 07-15-00206-CR & 07-15-00207-CR. He is represented by counsel in those 

causes. To any degree that relator’s petition for mandamus is connected with those 

pending causes, it is an improper attempt to accomplish hybrid representation. See 

Landers v. State, 550 S.W.2d 272, 280 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977) (op. on reh’g) (“There is 

no constitutional right in Texas to hybrid representation partially pro se and partially by 

counsel”).
AMOS DAIN REINA 

TAMBUNGA,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-4796

_____________________________/

Opinion filed November 7, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County.

William F. Stone, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, ROWE, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SEAN HARTFIELD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

OREGON STATE BAR; DOES, 1-10,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-35116

D.C. No. 3:16-cv-00068-ST

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Oregon

Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 16, 2016** 

Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Sean Hartfield appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a Fourteenth Amendment claim. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s

dismissal of an action as barred by the statute of limitations. Lukovsky v. City &

FILED

NOV 23 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
County of San Francisco, 535 F.3d 1044, 1047 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Hartfield’s action because it is barred

by the applicable statute of limitations. Although Hartfield maintains that he

should have been given leave to amend with regard to the statute of limitations

issue, he suggests no specific amendment that would have altered the accrual date

on which the district court relied. See Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103, 1109 (9th

Cir. 2009) (explaining that the statute of limitations for § 1983 actions is the state

law statute of limitations for personal injury actions, and that Oregon’s statute of

limitations for such actions is two years); Bagley v. CMC Real Estate Corp., 923

F.2d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 1991) (federal claim accrues when the plaintiff knows or

has reason to know of the injury); see also Levald, Inc. v. City of Palm Desert, 998

F.2d 680, 686-87 (9th Cir. 1993) (district courts may sua sponte consider the issue

of statute of limitations where defendant has not waived the defense and plaintiff

has been given a chance to address the issue).

AFFIRMED.

2 16-35116
**CERTIFICATION**     In connection with the periodic report of Corel Corporation (the    “Company”) on    Form 10-K    for the period ended November 30, 2007 as filed with the    Securities and Exchange Commission (the    “Report”), I, Douglas McCollam, Chief Financial    Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof,    solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,    Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of    my knowledge:     1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of    Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the    periods indicated.     This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed,    “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.     Date: February 8, 2008      By: /s/  DOUGLAS    McCOLLAM    Douglas McCollam*Chief Financial Officer*
|                       |   |                                                           |
|----------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|                       |   |                                                           |   |
| Date:  April 15, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Richard J. Wrensen                                    |   |
|                       |   | Richard J. Wrensen                                             |   |
|                       |   | President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                       |   |                                                           |   |

|   |   |                                        |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | By:    | /s/ Andrea Barney                      |   |
|   |   | Andrea Barney                               |   |
|   |   | Principal Accounting Officer and Controller |   |
|   |   |                                        |   |
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HARJINDER KUMAR, 

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-71392

Agency No. A071-944-709

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 15, 2012** 

Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Harjinder Kumar, a native and citizen of India, petitions pro se for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen

removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review

FILED

MAY 22 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-71392

for abuse of discretion, Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008),

and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Kumar’s second motion to

reopen as untimely where the motion was filed over a year and a half after the

BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Kumar failed to present

sufficient evidence of changed circumstances in India to qualify for an exception to

the time limit, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 996-

97 (evidence must demonstrate prima facie eligibility for relief in order to reopen

proceedings based on changed country conditions).

This court lacks jurisdiction to review Kumar’s contention that his former

counsel was ineffective. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004)

(court lacks jurisdiction to review contentions not raised before the agency).

Finally, Kumar’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 17, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, November 17, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17I0064. ANDREA ELLIOTT v. THE STATE.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

ST15CR1984
EXHIBIT 12.1            UNIFRAX CORPORATION COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO
                        FIXED CHARGES

                                              Year Ended         Year Ended
                                          December 31, 1996   December 31, 1997
                                            (in thousands)     (in thousands)

Earnings from continuing operations before
   income taxes                                  $20,183           $ 7,502
Fixed charges
     Interest                                      2,246            12,537
     Imputed interest on operating lease
        obligations                                  286               403
                                                 -------           -------
                                                   2,532            12,940
Adjusted earnings available for payment of
   fixed charges                                 $22,715           $20,442
                                                 -------           -------
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                   9.0               1.6
                                                 =======           =======
# C_2015288EN.01000102.xml

| 2.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7652 — Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich/Valida Holding)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 288/02)

On 26 August 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in German language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7652. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7652. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,556,046
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         199,284
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             2,023,404
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 11,695,721
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                     30,149,432
<ALLOWANCE>                                    376,817
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              49,615,595
<DEPOSITS>                                  38,763,519
<SHORT-TERM>                                 2,500,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            401,016
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,943,060
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              49,615,595
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,222,506
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              679,694
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               152,994
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             3,055,194
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,490,512
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,494,912
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,560,282
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  199,500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              15,713
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,267,750
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                304,684
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     255,052
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   255,052
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.16
<LOANS-NON>                                     11,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                     4,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               215,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   40,000
<RECOVERIES>                                     2,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              377,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           377,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
---

---

Exhibit 15.1

|
|
|

# CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File nos.
333-131991, 333-05670, 333-08824 and 333-12178) of Orckit Communications Ltd. of our
report dated April 16, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form
20-F.

|                 |                                    
|---------------- | -----------------------------------
|Tel-Aviv, Israel | /s/ Kesselman & Kesselman          
|April 16, 2008   | Certified Public Accountants (Isr.)





---

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-6839

ROBERT DALE SMART, a/k/a Robert Smart, a/k/a Robert D. 

Smart, 

 Petitioner – Appellant, 

 v. 

CECILIA REYNOLDS, Warden Kershaw Correctional Institution, 

 Respondent – Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior 

District Judge. (8:08-cv-03918-GRA-BHH) 

Submitted: September 29, 2009 Decided: October 7, 2009 

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Robert Dale Smart, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, 

Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., SOUTH 

CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE, Columbia, South Carolina, 

for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Robert Dale Smart seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order affirming the magistrate judge’s order denying Smart’s 

motion to compel discovery. This court may exercise 

jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), 

and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. 

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Smart seeks to 

appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory 

or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Smart’s motions for 

default judgment and dismiss the appeal for lack of 

jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

DISMISSED
(logo)Countrywide

                                             4500 Park Granada
                                             Calabasas, California 91302
                                             (818) 225-300O



April 22,1997



Grant Thornton LLP
1000 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90017



Gentlemen:

As of and for the year ended February 28, 1997,  Countrywide  Credit Industries,
Inc. and Subsidiaries (which includes its wholly-owned  subsidiary,  Countrywide
Home Loans, Inc.) ("the Company") has complied in all material respects with the
minimum  servicing  standards set forth in the Mortgage  Bankers  Association of
America's UNIFORM SINGLE  ATTESTATION FOR MORTGAGE  BANKERS.  As of and for this
same period,  the Company had in effect a fidelity bond and errors and omissions
policy in the amount of $30,000,000.


/s/Carlos M. Garcia
Carlos M. Garcia
Managing Director-Finance
Chief Financial Officer and
Chief Accounting Officer



(P:\gt\1997\42297b)
# C_2014431EN.01000101.xml

| 1.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

(2014/C 431/01)

Last publication

Last publication

OJ C 421, 24.11.2014

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 409, 17.11.2014

OJ C 395, 10.11.2014

OJ C 388, 3.11.2014

OJ C 380, 27.10.2014

OJ C 372, 20.10.2014

OJ C 361, 13.10.2014

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
---

---

Exhibit 13.1

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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Orckit Communications Ltd. (the
Company) for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Eric
Paneth, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, 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, 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.

|April 16, 2008 |  | By: /s/ Eric Paneth
Eric Paneth, Chief Executive Officer
|-------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

      ( print page 15610)    
Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review

The meeting announced below concerns Cooperative Research Agreements to the World Trade Center Health Program (U01) PAR 12-126, initial review.

In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting:

*Time and Date:*

8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., April 14, 2015 (Closed)

8:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m., April 15, 2015 (Closed)

*Place:*                     Atlanta Marriott Century Center, 2000 Century Boulevard NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30345, Telephone: (404) 325-0000.                

*Status:*                     The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c) (4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.                

*Matters To Be Discussed:*                     The meeting will include the initial review, discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response to “Cooperative Research Agreements Related to the World Trade Center Health Program (U01) PAR 12-126.”                

*Contact Person for More Information:*                     Nina Turner, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, CDC/NIOSH, 1095 Willowdale Road, Mailstop G905, Morgantown, West Virginia 26505, Telephone: (304) 285-5975.                

                    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                     **Federal Register**                     notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                

Elaine L. Baker, 

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2015-06650 Filed 3-23-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P