alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### STATE OF TEXAS

vs. 

### MIKE ALVIN RUIZ NO. 1524608, 1524439 IN 

### THE DISTRICT COURT 8th JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

### § 

### § § § 

### § HOPKINS COUNTY, TEXAf' 

# ILED
AT /I : 

## " ' Y

o ' c l ock __Lt:_

_ M 

### NOTICE OF APPEAL 

### M AY 1 9 

### 20 1 5 TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:**~tA** Now comes Mike Alvin Ruiz , Defendant in the above styled and numbered**ca~ kl** 

### 5 this written notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals of the State of Texas from the judgment of conviction and sentence herein rendered against Mike Alvin Ruiz

. Respectfully submitted , Roland Fergurson 1 804 Woodbridge Drive Sulphur Springs, TX 75482 Tel : (903) 335-8412 Fax: (903) 335-8412

# By**~~14~** Roland Fergurson State Bar No

. 007864 2 5 

### Attorney for Mike AJvjn 

### Ruj z

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on May 19 , 2015 , a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was served on the District Attorney's Office , Hopkins County , by Hand delivery

.
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 294

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Commending the Armed Forces for their efforts,

religion, or national origin.civilian personnel without regard to race, color,treatment and opportunity for their military andleadership, and success in providing equality of
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 294

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas on July 26, 1948, President Truman issued Executive Order 9981 ordering the integration of the Armed

Forces;

Whereas the President stated 50 years ago in the executive

order that it was ‘‘essential that there be maintained in

the armed services of the United States the highest

standards of democracy, with equality of treatment and
2

•HCON 294 EH

opportunity for all those who serve in our country’s defense’’;

Whereas in the executive order the President declared that

‘‘there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for

all persons in the armed services without regard to race,

color, religion or national origin’’;

Whereas, soon after the President issued the executive order,

United States forces in Korea were integrated, leading

the way to a fully integrated army;

Whereas the Armed Forces have used the implementation

and enforcement of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as additional tools to eliminate discrimination among their military and civilian personnel;

Whereas in 1998 minorities serve in senior leadership positions throughout the Armed Forces, as officers, as senior

non-commissioned officers, and as civilian leaders;

Whereas the Armed Forces have demonstrated a continuing

commitment to ensuring the equality of treatment and

opportunity for all military and civilian personnel of the

Armed Forces; and

Whereas the efforts of the Armed Forces to ensure the equality of treatment and opportunity for their personnel have

contributed significantly to the advancement of equality

of treatment and opportunity for all Americans: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress commends the Armed

3 Forces for their efforts, leadership, and success in provid4 ing equality of treatment and opportunity for their mili-
3

•HCON 294 EH

1 tary and civilian personnel without regard to race, color,

2 religion, or national origin.

Passed the House of Representatives July 29, 1998.

Attest:

Clerk.
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 322

Supporting religious tolerance toward Muslims.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 6, 1998

Mr. BONIOR (for himself and Mr. DAVIS of Virginia) submitted the following

concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Supporting religious tolerance toward Muslims.

Whereas the American Muslim community, comprised of approximately 5,000,000 people, is a vital part of our Nation, with more than 1,500 mosques, Islamic schools, and

Islamic centers in neighborhoods across the United

States;

Whereas Islam is one of the great Abrahamic faiths, whose

significant contributions throughout history have advanced the fields of math, science, medicine, law, philosophy, art, and literature;

Whereas the United States is a secular nation, with an unprecedented commitment to religious tolerance and pluralism, where the rights, liberties, and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution are guaranteed to all citizens regardless of religious affiliation;
2

•HCON 322 IH

Whereas Muslims have been subjected, simply because of

their faith, to acts of discrimination and harassment that

all too often have led to hate-inspired violence, as was the

case during the rush to judgment in the aftermath of the

tragic Oklahoma City bombing;

Whereas discrimination against Muslims intimidates American Muslims and may prevent Muslims from freely expressing their opinions and exercising their religious beliefs as guaranteed by the first amendment to the Constitution;

Whereas American Muslims have regrettably been portrayed

in a negative light in some discussions of policy issues

such as issues relating to religious persecution abroad or

fighting terrorism in the United States;

Whereas stereotypes and anti-Muslim rhetoric have also contributed to a backlash against Muslims in some neighborhoods across the United States; and

Whereas all persons in the United States who espouse and

adhere to the values of the founders of our Nation should

help in the fight against bias, bigotry, and intolerance in

all their forms and from all their sources: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That—

3 (1) Congress condemns anti-Muslim intolerance

4 and discrimination as wholly inconsistent with the

5 American values of religious tolerance and pluralism;

6 (2) while Congress respects and upholds the

7 right of individuals to free speech, Congress ac-
3

•HCON 322 IH

1 knowledges that individuals and organizations that

2 foster such intolerance create an atmosphere of ha3 tred and fear that divides the Nation;

4 (3) Congress resolves to uphold a level of politi5 cal discourse that does not involve making a scape6 goat of an entire religion or drawing political conclu7 sions on the basis of religious doctrine; and

8 (4) Congress recognizes the contributions of

9 American Muslims, who are followers of one of the

10 three major monotheistic religions of the world and

11 one of the fastest growing faiths in the United

12 States.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 121 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 121

    Disapproving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (most-
 favored-nation treatment) to the products of the People's Republic of 
                                 China.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 4, 1998

   Mr. Solomon introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Disapproving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (most-
 favored-nation treatment) to the products of the People's Republic of 
                                 China

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress does not 
approve the extension of the authority contained in section 402(c) of 
the Trade Act of 1974 recommended by the President to the Congress on 
June 3, 1998, with respect to the People's Republic of China.
                                 <all>
```
II

Calendar No. 421

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 113

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 23, 1998

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the location of a Martin Luther King, Jr.,

Memorial in the Nation’s Capital.

Whereas section 508 of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands

Management Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1003 note; 110

Stat. 4157) authorized the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity

to establish a memorial on Federal land in the District

of Columbia to honor Martin Luther King, Jr.;
2

HJ 113 PCS

Whereas section 6(a) of the Commemorative Works Act (40

U.S.C. 1006(a)) provides that the location of a commemorative work in the area described as Area I (within

the meaning of the Act) shall be deemed not authorized

unless approved by law not later than 150 days after notification to Congress that the Secretary of the Interior

recommends location of the commemorative work in Area

I; and

Whereas the Secretary of the Interior has notified Congress

of the recommendation of the Secretary that the memorial be located in Area I: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., MEMORIAL.

4 The location of the commemorative work to honor

5 Martin Luther King, Jr., authorized by section 508 of the

6 Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of

7 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1003 note; 110 Stat. 4157), within Area

8 I is approved under section 6(a) of the Commemorative

9 Works Act (40 U.S.C. 1006(a)).

Passed the House of Representatives June 22, 1998.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 421

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 113

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the location of a Martin Luther King,

Jr., Memorial in the Nation’s Capital.

JUNE 23, 1998

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           3,569
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,588
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,137
<INVENTORY>                                      7,955
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,524
<PP&E>                                           6,703
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,176
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  40,568
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,161
<BONDS>                                          4,286
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        14,389
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,268
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    40,568
<SALES>                                         23,621
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,621
<CGS>                                           12,283
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                19,090
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,811
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 681
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,457)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,045)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,412)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,412)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.95)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.95)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

[LETTERHEAD OF Centerpoint(TM) Energy]


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                Page 1 of 1

                      CenterPoint Energy subsidiaries close
                financing transactions totaling over $1.6 billion

   CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp.:

     [X]  Closed on $650 million of senior notes
     [X]  Retired significant portion of debt maturing in Nov. 2003
     [X]  Closed $200 million revolving credit facility
   CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric:
     [X]  Closed on more than $762 million of general mortgage bonds

         Houston, TX - March 25, 2003 - CenterPoint Energy, Inc. (NYSE:CNP)
announced today that it completed financing transactions totaling more than $1.6
billion.

         Today, the company's natural gas distribution, pipelines and gathering
operations subsidiary, CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. (CERC), closed on $650
million of 7.875 percent senior unsecured notes. A portion of the proceeds were
used to retire $260 million of CERC's 6 3/8 percent Term Enhanced ReMarketable
Securities (TERMS). The remaining $240 million of TERMS are due to be refinanced
or remarketed in November. Proceeds were also used to extinguish a $350 million
bank revolver due to expire on March 31. As a result, a previously announced
commitment for a $350 million bridge financing facility expired.

         In addition, CERC closed a $200 million revolving credit facility which
will be used for working capital needs. This 364-day facility has a drawn cost
of LIBOR plus 250 basis points at existing credit ratings.

         On March 18, CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC (CEHE), the
company's electric transmission and distribution subsidiary, closed on general
mortgage bonds totaling over $762 million. Of this, $450 million are 10-year
bonds with a coupon rate of 5.7 percent, and $312.275 million are 30-year bonds
with a coupon rate of 6.95 percent. Proceeds will be used to enable the parent
to repay $150 million of medium term notes maturing on April 21, to redeem
$312.275 million of first mortgage bonds of CEHE and to repay $279 million of a
$537 million intercompany note to CenterPoint Energy. Part of the proceeds from
this repayment were used to repay bank loans and permanently reduce the $3.85
billion parent bank credit facility by $50 million.

         The securities have not been registered under the Securities Act of
1933 and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration or
an applicable exemption from registration under that Act.

          This news release does not constitute an offer to sell, or the
solicitation of an offer to buy, any security and shall not constitute an offer,
solicitation or sale in any jurisdiction in which such offering would be
unlawful.

                                       ###
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 201 Agreed to House (ATH)]

  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 201

            Providing for an adjournment of the two Houses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 27, 1998

  Mr. Armey submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
            Providing for an adjournment of the two Houses.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Wednesday, 
January 28, 1998, it stand adjourned until 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, 
February 3, 1998; that when the House adjourns on Thursday, February 5, 
1998, it stand adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 11, 
1998; and that when the House adjourns on Thursday, February 12, 1998, 
it stand adjourned until 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, February 24, 1998, or 
until noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
first; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of 
business on Friday, February 13, 1998, pursuant to motion made by the 
Majority Leader, or his designee, in accordance with this concurrent 
resolution, it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on Monday, 
February 23, 1998, or such time on that day as may be specified by the 
Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or 
until noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 27, 1998.

                                 <all>
```
#### Denise POLLINGTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS (USA) INC.; Kevin Baker, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-1567

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Filed February 27, 2018

Scott E. Combs, Law Office, Novi, MI, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Toni J. Read, Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, Atlanta, GA, Barbara Eckert Buchanan, Bethany Steffke Sweeny, Vamum, Detroit, MI, for Defendants-Appellees

BEFORE: BOGGS, BATCHELDER, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges.

THAPAR, Circuit Judge.

Denise Pollington sued her former employer, G4S Secure Solutions, and former supervisor, Kevin Baker, for alleged violations of Michigan law. She brought her suit in Michigan state court. G4S removed the case to federal court, claiming diversity jurisdiction. One problem: The parties’ filings suggest that both Pollington and Baker are Michigan citizens. *See Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis,*519 U.S. 61, 68, 117 S.Ct. 467, 136 L.Ed.2d 437 (1996) (noting that the citizenship of each plaintiff must be diverse from the citizenship of *each*defendant to create diversity jurisdiction); *see also*28 U.S.C. § 1332. In its notice of removal, G4S claimed that the district court should “disregard” Baker’s citizenship because Pollington failed to properly serve him, and in any event, that his presence in the suit would amount to fraudulent joinder. Instead of addressing these arguments and their effect on its jurisdiction, the district court allowed the litigation to proceed and ultimately granted both defendants summary judgment.

The district court should not have proceeded to summary judgment until it resolved these lingering questions about its jurisdiction. *See Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co.,*526 U.S. 574, 583, 119 S.Ct. 1563, 143 L.Ed.2d 760 (1999). Jurisdiction must be established as a threshold matter — “inflexibly] and without exception.” *Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t,*523 U.S. 83, 94-95, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 140 L.Ed.2d 210 (1998). So anytime a defendant removes to federal court, it must show that it has the right to be there. *See Eastman v. Marine Mech. Corp.,*438 F.3d 544, 549 (6th Cir. 2006). And it cannot do so merely by pointing to the other party’s consent or waiver. *See Ins. Corp. of Ir. v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee,*456 U.S. 694, 702, 102 S.Ct. 2099, 72 L.Ed.2d 492 (1982). As such, even in the absence of an objection by Pollington, the district court was obligated to consider its jurisdiction sua sponte, at which point it could have done one of two things. Had it determined that Baker was improperly served or fraudulently joined, it should have dismissed him from the suit. *See*Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); *Probus v. Charter Commc’ns, LLC,*234 Fed.Appx. 404, 407 (6th Cir. 2007). Alternatively, had it found that Baker was a proper party to the suit, it should have remanded the case to state court. *See Saginaw Hous. Comm’n v. Bannum, Inc.,*576 F.3d 620, 624 (6th Cir. 2009). It should not, however, have skipped over these jurisdictional issues and ruled on the merits.

*567Accordingly, we VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND the case for a determination of whether diversity jurisdiction exists.
# L_2006095DE.01001203.xml

| 4.4.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 95/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 95/12

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1433/2003 der Kommission vom 11. August 2003 mit Durchführungsbestimmungen zur Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2200/96 des Rates hinsichtlich der Betriebsfonds, der operationellen Programme und der finanziellen Beihilfe

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 203 vom 12. August 2003
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 203 vom 12. August 2003

Seite 28, Artikel 4 Absatz 4:

anstatt:

„(4)   Hat sich der Wert der Erzeugung aus vom Mitgliedstaat ordnungsgemäß nachgewiesenen Gründen, die außerhalb der Verantwortung der Erzeugerorganisation liegen und sich ihrer Kontrolle entziehen, verringert, so beträgt der Wert der vermarkteten Erzeugung gemäß Absatz 1 mindestens 65 % des Wertes des betreffenden Erzeugnisses im vorangegangenen Referenzzeitraum.“

muss es heißen:

„(4)   Hat sich der Wert eines Erzeugnisses aus dem Mitgliedstaat ordnungsgemäß nachgewiesenen Gründen, die außerhalb der Verantwortung der Erzeugerorganisation liegen und sich ihrer Kontrolle entziehen, verringert, so beträgt der Wert der vermarkteten Erzeugung gemäß Absatz 1 mindestens 65 % des Wertes des betreffenden Erzeugnisses im vorangegangenen Referenzzeitraum.“

---
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 on Form 10-Q of Emerald Dairy Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Yang Yong Shan, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President 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, to the best of my 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 result of operations of the Company.





Date:  May 23, 2011





By:
/s/ Yang Yong ShanName:
Yang Yong ShanTitle:
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President(Principal Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The   undersigned,   who  is  the  Chief  Executive   Officer  of  International
Microcomputer  Software,  Inc. (the  "Company"),  hereby  certifies that (i) the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the three-month period ended March 31, 2004,
as filed by the  Company  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (the
"Quarterly Report"),  to which this Certification is an Exhibit,  fully complies
with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act;
and (ii) the information  contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in
all material respects,  the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



DATE: MAY 13, 2004

/S/ MARTIN WADE, III
Martin Wade, III
Director & Chief Executive Officer



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by section 906 has been
provided to International  Microcomputer  Software, Inc. and will be retained by
International  Microcomputer  Software, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.