alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent, <br><br>against<br><br>Samuel Williams, Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Mount Vernon, Westchester County (William Edwards, J., at plea; Mark A. Gross, J., at sentencing), rendered April 28, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]) seeking leave to withdraw as counsel.</p><p>ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.</p><p>We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to <i>Anders v California</i> (386 US 738 [1967]), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (<i>see id.</i>; <i>Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.]</i>, 89 AD3d 252 [2011]; <i>People v Paige</i>, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; <i>cf. People v Gonzalez</i>, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]).</p><p>Brands, J.P., Marano and Tolbert, JJ., concur.</p><br>Decision Date: November 28, 2016<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Dismiss and Opinion Filed April 15, 2014 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00059-CV DONAL R. SCHMIDT, JR. AND TH IMOTHY S. WAFFORD, Appellants V. P.I. HOLDINGS I, INC., AND COMPASS BANK, Appellees On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-02486 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, and Justices Lang-Miers and Brown Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The clerk’s record in this case is overdue. By letter dated February 5, 2014, we informed appellants the clerk’s record had not been file d because appellants had not paid for the clerk’s record. We directed appellants to provide verification of payment or arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record or to provide wr itten documentation that they had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellan ts that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. To date, the cler k’s record has not been filed, and appellants have not provided the required doc umentation or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of the clerk’s record.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c).

140059F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

DONAL R. SCHMIDT, JR. AND THIMOTHY S. WAFFORD, Appellants

No. 05-14-00059-CV V.
P.I. HOLDINGS I, INC., AND COMPASS BANK, Appellees On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-02486. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Brown participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellees P.I. HOLDINGS I, INC., AND COMPASS BANK recover their costs of this appeal from a ppellants DONAL R. SCHM IDT, JR. AND THIMOTHY S. WAFFORD.

Judgment entered April 15, 2014

/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
March 2 1,2007 Facility Name: Attn: OwnerIOperator Facility Address



### RE: Request for Air Quality Permit Information Dear 

### RP The Gila River Indian Community Council, approvedthe GRIC Air Quality Management Program Plan on December 6,2006. The GlUC Air QualityManagement Program Plan requires that sources of air pollution that meet or exceed the thresholds in Part 

### TI, PermitRequirements, Subsection2.1(C) of the Plan submit a complete permit application within one hundred twenty (120) days of receivingnotice from the Directorthat a permit application is required. This letter serves as formal written notice that is required to submit 

### a completepermit application. A Complete Permit Application is defined in Part 11, Permit Requirements, Subsection 3.1(B). Non-Title V Permit ApplicationForms and the GlUC Air Quality Management Program Plan are attached. GRIC Air Quality personnel are availableupon request to assist with completionof permit application forms. If you have any questions please contact Daniel Blair or Willard Antone 111at (520) 562-2234. Sincerely, Margaret Cook, Director, GlUC Department of Environmental Quality
# C_2014436EN.01000601.xml

| 5.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/6

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

4 December 2014

(2014/C 436/03)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2311 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 147,64 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4400 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,78610 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2747 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2035 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,7210 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,616 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 306,90 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1614 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4290 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,7556 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4692 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3998 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,5440 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5888 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6187 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 373,54 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,7641 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,5777 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6753 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 157,92 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,2454 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 54,846 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 65,7875 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,518 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,1728 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,3743 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 76,2063 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2311

JPY

Japanese yen

147,64

DKK

Danish krone

7,4400

GBP

Pound sterling

0,78610

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2747

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2035

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,7210

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,616

HUF

Hungarian forint

306,90

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1614

RON

Romanian leu

4,4290

TRY

Turkish lira

2,7556

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4692

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3998

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,5440

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5888

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6187

KRW

South Korean won

1 373,54

ZAR

South African rand

13,7641

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,5777

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6753

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 157,92

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,2454

PHP

Philippine peso

54,846

RUB

Russian rouble

65,7875

THB

Thai baht

40,518

BRL

Brazilian real

3,1728

MXN

Mexican peso

17,3743

INR

Indian rupee

76,2063

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
DoT-G^T- aoo5- \^'^'^':i 

' •LT ; ;' I, 

. /; • A':' ' 

A t R L I N E S 

January 11,2012 

Dennis J. DeVany 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

US Department of Transportation 

400 Seventh Street, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

SkyWest Airlines' Essential Air Service at Cedar City, UT 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

On September 15, 2011 SkyWest Airlines was awarded the Essential Air Service contract 

for continuing operations at Cedar City, UT. The proposal submitted included a change 

of aircraft type from the EMB120 to the CRJ200, a 50-seat regional jet. 

After the awarding of the contracu it was discovered that the Cedar City airport does not 

have the required operational permits for scheduled jet service. SkyWest is working with 

the airport to obtain the authorization, which will include an environmental assessment. 

Operations at the airport will continue as planned with an EMB120 aircraft. It is 

currently unknown how long it will take to work through the process and resume with 

plans for jet service. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

r. 

Michael Thompson 

Vice President - Market Development 

SkyWest Airlines
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of China Biopharmaceuticals Holdings,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated
below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

1)   The report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                 /s/ Chris Peng Mao
                                                 ------------------
                                                 Chris Peng Mao
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                                 November 14, 2008
# C_2015322EN.01000102.xml

| 30.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 322/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 322/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7484 — Plastipak/APPE)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 322/02)

On 11 June 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 English 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 32015M7484. EUR-Lex is the online 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 32015M7484. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1268

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BHUPENDRA PATEL, Former Owner of Y & J Food

Market,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. James H. Michael, Jr.,

Senior District Judge. (CA-96-102-3-C)

Submitted: July 24, 1997 Decided: August 6, 1997

Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bhupendra Patel, Appellant Pro Se. Julie C. Dudley, Assistant

United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order granting a default judgment against Appellant. We have reviewed the record and

the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United

States v. Patel, No. CA-96-102-3-C (W.D. Va. Feb. 6, 1997). 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.

AFFIRMED
*Product ingredient

*Product ingredient source information may be entitled to confidential treatment*

*Pro ource information may be entitled to confidential treatment* *Product may be entitled to confidential treatment* *Prod rmation may be entitled to confidential treatment* *Product ingredient

*Product ingredient source


















source information may be entitled to confidential treatment*

*Product ingredient so
#### Clifton vs. The State.

*May 11*

June *4, 1881.*

Crimihal Law. *Evidence of larceny.*

The evidence in this case (stated in the opinion) being conclusive that plaintiff in error was guilty of the larceny of which he was convicted, and that the goods taken by him were not taken as lost or abandoned property, it was not necessary to pass upon the instructions .given to the jury.

ERROR to the Municipal Oourt of *Milwaukee*County.

*James*Hickcox, for the plaintiff in error.

*H. W.*Chynoweth, Assistant Attorney General, for the state.

Lyon, J.

The plaintiff in error, with one Bautz, was informed against, tided, and convicted of stealing- two clarionets, the property of one Faetkenhauer, of the value of $25 each. The proof shows conclusively that the owner of the instruments, who was a saloon-keeper and musician, had been playing at some place away from home during the night; and that he returned to his home between four and five o’clock in the morning, left the box containing the instruments on or near a beer keg in front of his saloon, and within three or four feet of the entrance thereto, entered his saloon by a back door, and within a few minutes opened the front door from the inside. While he was doing this, the plaintiff in error and Bautz passed the saloon, opened the box, ascertained its contents, and *534took it away with them. During the same morning they pawned or-sold the box and contents for three dollars in money and fifty cents in drinks. They made no attempt to find to whom the instruments belonged, and did not even take the trouble to read the signs of the owner on his saloon, which contained his name three times, and which they might have read, had they been so disposed. Under this evidence, there is no room for the claim that the box and contents were lost or abandoned property. The evidence of the guilt of these men of the crime charged in the information is absolutely conclusive. Their testimony on the trial introduced no element of doubt or uncertainty as to their guilt. This being so, it is not necessary to pass upon the instructions which the learned judge of the municipal court gave the jury. We have looked into them, however, and think they state the law correctly.

*By the*Court.— J udgment affirmed.
#### State vs. Sheppard.

Cbiminal Law. *Questions of law arising on trial must be reported to this court, under sec.*8, *ch.*180, *It. S., before judgment. Oan come after judgment only by writ of error.*

Under the statute (R. S., eh. 180, secs. 8-10), doubtful questions of law arising on the trial of a criminal action, may he *reported*to this court for determination; hut such report must he made *before judgment.*And where a case is so reported *after*judgment (instead of being brought here on writ of error), this court has no authority to determine the questions submitted by the trial court, or to make any order upon the report.

REPORTED from the Circuit Court for *Jaclcson*County.

*The Attorney General,*for the state.

*'Cameron & Losev,*for defendant.

LyON, J.

This case comes here on the report of the judge of the sixth circuit, submitting certain questions of law to this court for determination. It appears from the report that the defendant was tried and convicted on a criminal information against him, and that judgment was duly pronounced and entered upon such conviction.

Doubtful questions of law arising on the trial of a criminal case may be reported to this court for determination. R. S., *396ch. 180, sec. 8. But the report must be made before judgment. After judgment, a writ of error must be resorted to, in order to have the case reviewed by this court. It is very clear that the legislature did not intend that the report which is authorized should ever perform the office of a writ of error. The provisions of secs. 8, 9 and 10 of the above chapter all show a contrary intention.

We have no authority to determine the questions which the learned circuit judge has attempted to submit to us, and can take no action on the report, nor make any order thereon.
Exhibit 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



Board of Directors and Shareholders
GraphOn Corporation


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-88255 and No.
333-40174) of GraphOn Corporation of our report dated February 7,
2003, relating to the consolidated financial statements, which
appears in this Form 10-K.  We also consent to the incorporation
by reference of our report dated February 7, 2003, relating to
the financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form
10-K.  Our report on the consolidated financial statements
contains an explanatory paragraph regarding the Company's ability
to continue as a going concern.



/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
BDO Seidman, LLP
San Jose, California

March 28, 2003
EXHIBIT 32

                          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                           18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                           AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

   In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tac Asset Corp. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed  with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I,
Anthony  N  DeMint, President and Chief Accounting Officer  of  the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to  Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The  information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in  all
          material   respects,  the  financial  condition  and   results   of
          operations of the Company.



                              /s/ Anthony N. DeMint
                              Anthony n. DeMint
                              President and Chief Accounting Officer
                              August 4, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          10,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   32,200
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      9,191
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         466,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                 145,100
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 506,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        362,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    193,900
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (203,100)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   498,800
<SALES>                                        189,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               685,100
<CGS>                                           30,200
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  690,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              36,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (26,300)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (27,800)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (27,800)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# C_2015323EN.01000102.xml

| 1.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 323/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 323/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7735 — Fosun/BHF-KB)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 323/02)

On 15 September 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 English 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 32015M7735. EUR-Lex is the online 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 32015M7735. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

March 19, 2014

N o. 04

- 12

- 00768

- CR

Anthony GONZALES

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Frio County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11

- 05

- 00079

- CRF

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

The Appellant ’ s Motion for Leave to Withdraw is hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

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

court on this 19th day of March, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# C_2014361EN.01000101.xml

| 13.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 361/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 361/1

---

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 361/01

Last publication

Last publication

OJ C 351, 6.10.2014

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 339, 29.9.2014

OJ C 329, 22.9.2014

OJ C 315, 15.9.2014

OJ C 303, 8.9.2014

OJ C 292, 1.9.2014

OJ C 282, 25.8.2014

These texts are available on:

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

---