alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### James M. Donley, Respondent, *v.*William Graham, Appellant.

No appeal lies to this court from an order denying a motion for a new trial on the ground of surprise or newly discovered evidence. The question is one of discretion with the court below.

(Argued May 17, 1871;

decided September term, 1871.)

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the sixth district, affirming a judgment for plaintiff on verdict, and affirming order denying motion for new trial on the evidence and on account of newly discovered evidence. *659The only errors alleged were, the verdict was against the weight of evidence, and that the motion for new trial was improperly denied. *Held,*that an appeal cannot be entertained in this court upon either of these grounds.

*G. L. Sessions*for the appellant.

*L. Seymour*for the respondent.

Leonard, C., reads for affirmance.

All concur. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 8, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00557

- CV

Ex Parte S.H.R.

,

From the 112th Judicial District Court, Sutt on County, Texas

Trial Court No. 6083

Honorable Pedro Gomez, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

This is an appeal by the Texas Department of Public Safety from an order granting an

expunction. Appellee has filed in this court a “Motion to Substitute Initials for Given Name.” In

the motion, appellee asks that we use appellee’s initials in the style of the case as opposed to

appellee’s full given name. After reviewing the motion and applicable a uthority, we GRANT

appellee’s motion. We ORDER that appellee’s initials, S.H.R., be substituted for her full given

name in the style of the case as well as any ensuing opinion, judgment, and mandate. We

ORDER the clerk of this court to change all referen ces to appellee from her full given name to

S.H.R.

We further order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on all counsel.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

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

court on this 8th day of September, 2 016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 32****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AND EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(b)**     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Option Care, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the datehereof (the “Report”), we, Rajat Rai, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Paul Mastrapa,Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of ourknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) that:     (1) This Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Date: August 9, 2007 By:  /s/ Rajat Rai    Rajat Rai    Chief Executive Officer      Date: August 9, 2007 By:  /s/ Paul Mastrapa    Paul Mastrapa    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.1


                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 Chromcraft Revington, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 2, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Benjamin M. Anderson-Ray, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and
Frank T. Kane, Vice President - Finance, and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, 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
              operation of the Company.





/s/ Benjamin M. Anderson-Ray
----------------------------------------
Benjamin M. Anderson-Ray
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

August 5, 2005





/s/ Frank T. Kane
----------------------------------------
Frank T. Kane
Vice President-Finance and
Chief Financial Officer

August 5, 2005


         This certification is furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document or for any other purpose.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001084904
<NAME>                        BE SAFE SERVICES, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         13,652
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  14,730
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               28,382
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 38,291
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          19,311
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          454
<OTHER-SE>                                     18,526
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   38,291
<SALES>                                        14,730
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               14,730
<CGS>                                           3,139
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   3,139
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 7,229
<INCOME-TAX>                                    2,415
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             4,814
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    4,814
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0



</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 9074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03440]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders 
and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict SEP.
    Date: February 21, 2022.
    Time: 3:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 
Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Natalia Strunnikova, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of 
Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 
3208, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-496-3755, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0967687d68656068277a7d7b7c67676062667f6849676061276e667f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="204e4154414c49410e535452554e4e494b4f5641604e49480e474f56">[email protected]</span></a>.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, 
Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, 
Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 14, 2022.
Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-03440 Filed 2-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Opinion issued November 9, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-17-00794-CV

———————————

IN RE HAROLD GOLDBERG, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this mandamus proceeding, relator contends that the trial court abused its 

discretion by granting a motion for new trial.

1

 We lack jurisdiction over the associate 

judge.2 

 

1 The underlying case is In the Matter of the Marriage of Jennifer KarpinskyGoldberg v. Harold Goldberg, cause number 2016-68107, pending in the 308th 

District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable David Sydow presiding. 

2 See In re Clark, No. 01-15-00458-CV, 2015 WL 3877787, at *1 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] June 23, 2015, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.) 
2

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

Panel consist of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Brown.

 

(holding that court of appeals does not have jurisdiction over associate judge). We 

note that the Texas Legislature has recently changed our mandamus jurisdiction to 

encompass associate judges. See Act of May 27, 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., ch. 1013, 

H.B. 1480, § 1 (to be codified as an amendment to TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. 

§ 22.221). However, the change in the statute applies to suits filed after September 

1, 2017. Id. § 2 (“Section 22.221(b) . . . as amended by this Act, applies only to a 

suit . . . filed on or after the effective date of this Act.”). Because the underlying 

suit was filed prior to September 1, 2017, we lack jurisdiction.
Date: Time :

O Pass O Failed

Airport Notified : 

 If Yes Contact Name :

Phone Number :

Comments :

Weather Good Fair

Visibility Good Fair

Wind Speed Low Medium

Proximity to Congested Population :

Signature _________________________________

Aproximate Flight Duration :

Inspected By :

Aditional Comments :

Safety Concerns :

Coments :

Adress:

Proximity to Heavily Traveled Roads :

Flight Log

Proximity to Airport :

Location:

Pre-Flight 

Inspection
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF PERIODIC REPORT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this annual report on Form 10-KSB of eOn Communications Corporation (Registrant) I, David S. Lee, Chief
Executive Officer of Registrant , certify, 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 this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.



|                       |  |  |  |                        
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: October 30, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/    DAVID S. LEE    
|                       |  |  |  | David S. Lee           
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer

In connection with this annual report on Form 10-KSB of eOn Communications Corporation
(Registrant) I, Stephen R. Bowling, Chief Financial Officer of Registrant, certify, 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 this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Registrant.



|                       |  |  |  |                          
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------
|Date: October 30, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/    STEPHEN R.
BOWLING
|                       |  |  |  | Stephen R. Bowling       
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Judd James SCHWARTZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-30015

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted August 9, 2017 *

Filed August 14, 2017

Timothy John Racicot, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USMI—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Judd James Schwartz, Pro Se

Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Judd James Schwartz appeals from the revocation of supervised release and the 10-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Schwartz’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Schwartz the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

©FF8C8AL iUSSMESa

STATE ©F TEXAS

PEMALTYFOK . i-V go,,

4/29/2015 PRIVATE USE N

BELLOTTI, CARL MATTHEW^

09-07283-A WR-53,835-05,

This is to advise that the Court has^denied. without written order the application for

writ of habeas corpus on the findings of the tnal court without a hearing.

Abel Acosta, Clerk

CARL MATTHEW BELLOTTI III

jAST TEXAS TREATMENT FACILITY - TDC #

755639 UTF

• nwn^-a^TM 0 2 1M __ gg e^^^S: 0004279596 APR 30 2015

A.y^-'k rjSM^&SS&k MAILED FROM ZIPCODE 78701 AKA BELOTTI, CARL MATHEW III Tr. Ct. No.

W3B VB&S2 HmHSVTnu7§^340
#### RACETECH, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. KENTUCKY DOWNS, LLC, Exacta Systems, LLC, FKA Encore Gaming, LLC, Defendants-Appellees

2016-1672

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

February 13, 2017

*1010Richard L. Brophy, Armstrong Teasdale LLP, St, Louis, MO, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by Mark A. Thomas, Zachary Charles Howenstine.

Spiro Bereveskos, Woodard, Emhardt, Moriarty, McNett & Henry LLP, Indianapolis, IN, argued for defendants-appel-lees. Also represented by William Alex McKenna.

(Wallaeh, Hughes, and Stoll, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
Although it has no pr actica l effe ct bec ause the parties’ s et t l em en t ag ree ment calls for a 1 J une 30, 2008, move- out date, the dismiss al of the petition f or writ of ma

ndamus and the unde rlying appea l results in the dissolut ion of the stay beca use we no longe r have a case over which we ha ve jurisdiction to protect. SeeTex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221(a) (West 2004). 

### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN
NO. 03-0 7 -00 620 -CV
In re Mar ia Maya Hernandez

ORI GINAL PRO CEEDING FRO M TRAVIS CO UNTY
M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N
I n October2007, this Court gra nted re lator Mar ia Maya He rnande z’s moti on fo r e me rg e nc y

re lie f t o h a lt a

n e vic tio n. Th e mot ion

fo r t e mporary rel ief

wa s f ile d a nc ill ary to Her nandez’s petition for wr it of mandamus, or, alternatively writ of injunction. This court g rante d relief in order to pr otect our jurisdiction over the subject matter

of the manda

mus and the under ly ing appea l. See I

n re Ma r i a Ma

ya He rnandez , s lip op ., No . 0 3- 07 -0 06 20 -C V ( Te x. Ap p. —Aus tin October 30, 2007). The parties have now filed a joint agree d motion to dismiss based on a s et t lement ag ree ment. SeeTex. R. App. P . 42.2(a) . Acc ording ly , we gr ant t he mot ion and dismiss t he petition fo r wri t of

mand amus . 12 W. Kenneth L aw, Chief Justice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Pembe rton and Waldrop Filed: June 5, 2008
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6440 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for purposes of the tax 

on private foundation excess business holdings to treat as outstanding 

any employee-owned stock purchased by a business enterprise pursuant 

to certain employee stock ownership retirement plans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 15, 2023 

Mr. STEUBE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for purposes 

of the tax on private foundation excess business holdings 

to treat as outstanding any employee-owned stock purchased by a business enterprise pursuant to certain employee stock ownership retirement plans. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6440 IH

1 SECTION 1. CERTAIN PURCHASES OF EMPLOYEE-OWNED 

2 STOCK DISREGARDED FOR PURPOSES OF 

3 FOUNDATION TAX ON EXCESS BUSINESS 

4 HOLDINGS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 4943(c)(4)(A) of the In6 ternal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the 

7 end the following new clause: 

8 ‘‘(v) For purposes of clause (i), subpara9 graph (D), and paragraph (2), any voting stock 

10 which— 

11 ‘‘(I) is not readily tradable on an es12 tablished securities market, 

13 ‘‘(II) is purchased by the business en14 terprise on or after January 1, 2005, from 

15 an employee stock ownership plan (as de16 fined in section 4975(e)(7)) in which em17 ployees of such business enterprise partici18 pate, in connection with a distribution 

19 from such plan, and 

20 ‘‘(III) is held by the business enter21 prise as treasury stock, cancelled, or re22 tired, 

23 shall be treated as outstanding voting stock, but 

24 only to the extent so treating such stock would 

25 not result in permitted holdings exceeding 49 

26 percent (determined without regard to this 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 6440 IH

1 clause). The preceding sentence shall not apply 

2 with respect to the purchase of stock from a 

3 plan during the 10-year period beginning on the 

4 date the plan is established.’’. 

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by 

7 this section shall apply to taxable years ending after 

8 the date of the enactment of this Act and to pur9 chases by a business enterprise of voting stock in 

10 taxable years beginning before, on, or after the date 

11 of the enactment of this Act. 

12 (2) SPECIAL RULE FOR GRANDFATHERED

13 FOUNDATIONS IN CASE OF DECREASE IN OWNER14 SHIP BY REASON OF PRE-ENACTMENT PUR15 CHASES.—Section 4943(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Internal 

16 Revenue Code of 1986 shall not apply with respect 

17 to any decrease in the percentage of holdings in a 

18 business enterprise by reason of the application of 

19 section 4943(c)(4)(A)(v) of such Code (as added by 

20 this section). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Alexander G. MOODY, former husband, Petitioner, v. Laura Grippa MOODY, former wife, Respondent.

No. 1D17-5143

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 2, 2018

Alexander G. Moody, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley W. Cox of Bedell, Dittmar, DeVault, Pillans & Coxe, Jacksonville, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied on the merits.

Wetherell, Rowe, and Winokur, JJ., concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Aaron HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-51084 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed June 9, 2017

*273Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, Kenneth P. Kaplan, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, El Paso, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Richard Gale Ferguson, Esq., Waco, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Aaron Hernandez, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Aaron Hernandez pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and was sentenced to 70 months of imprisonment. On appeal, he argues that the district court erred by assessing a base offense level of 24 pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1(a)(2) based in part on his prior Texas conviction for possession of cocaine. Because Hernandez objects to the application of U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 on a different ground than was raised in the district court, we review the issue for plain error only. *See Puckett v. United States,*556 U.S. 129, 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009); *United States v, Garcia-Mendez,*420 F.3d 454, 455-56 (5th Cir. 2005).

Hernandez’s challenge to his sentence is unavailing. Under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2), the base offense level is 24 if the defendant has two prior felony convictions for controlled substance offenses or crimes of violence. Hernandez’s prior Texas convictions for burglary of a habitation and assault by strangulation are both crimes of violence under the Guidelines for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1. *See United States v. Uribe,*838 F.3d 667, 670-71 (5th Cir. 2016), *cert. denied,*— U.S. —, 137 S.Ct. 1359, 197 L.Ed.2d 542 (2017); *United States v. Howell,*838 F.3d 489, 492 (5th Cir. 2016), *cert. denied,*— U.S. —, 137 S.Ct. 1108, 197 L.Ed.2d 212 (2017). Thus, Hernandez cannot show that the purported error affected his substantial rights. *See Puckett,*556 U.S. at 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir, R. 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, R, 47.5.4.