alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Sherif A. PHILIPS, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE; North Carolina Court System; North Carolina Agency; Vidant Medical Center, f/k/a Pitt County Memorial Hospital; Paul Bolin, M.D.; Ralph Whatley, M.D.; David Creech, Pitt County Memorial Hospital lawyer; Jay Salsman, Pitt County Memorial Hospital lawyer; Debbie Meyer, Law Firm, Cary, NC; Karen Zaner, Law Firm, Dallas, TX; James Crouse, Law Firm, Raleigh, NC; Nardine Guirguis, Law Firm, Raleigh, NC, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-2186

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 15, 2018

Decided: February 16, 2018

Sherif Philips, Appellant Pro Se. Kathryn Hicks Shields, Assistant Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Walter Gregory Merritt, HARRIS, CREECH, WARD & BLACKERBY, New Bern, North Carolina; Joseph Lawrence Nelson, DICKIE, MCCAMEY & CHILCOTE, Charlotte, North Carolina; John Thomas Crook, David Stebbins Coats, BAILEY & DIXON, Raleigh, North Carolina; Felix Hill Allen, IV, THARRINGTON SMITH LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Sherif Philips seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion and his subsequent motion to reopen his case. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” *Bowles v. Russell,*551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).

The district court’s orders denying Philips’ Rule 60(b) motion and motion to reopen were entered on the docket on June 15, 2017, and August 22, 2017, respectively. The notice of appeal was filed on September 26, 2017. Because Philips failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

Building Conservation Connections 

using the principles of GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 

www.nps.gov/rtca

www.nps.gov/rtca
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

Green Infrastructure

framework for conservation/managed growth

NETWORK

-natural/working lands

-connections

APPROACH-Protection

-strategic

-proactive

-predictability

APPROACH-Implementation

-multiple goals/supporters

-stakeholders/partners

-diverse financial plan

LAND CONSERVATION

-biodiversity/environmental function

-connecting fragmented lands 

WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

-focus protection on sub watersheds

-priority lands for water resources

COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANS

-land use allocation + management

-linking urban/suburban/rural lands

LARGE LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION

-effectively manage land and water

-perspective for informed decisions

-targeting priority areas

-collaborative problem solving 
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

Land Conservation

green infrastructure to strategic conservation planning

Cacapon and Lost Rivers 

Land Trust, West Virginia
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

Watershed Management

Deer Creek, Maryland

sub-watersheds to protect

Carr’s Creek, New York

Riparian landowners 
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

Comprehensive Land Use Plans

informing local land use decisions-protecting resources

building conservation community to

enhance implementation of GI plan

Frederick County, Maryland 
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

Large Landscape Conservation

protecting land\water across landscape types and scales Upper Susquehanna Basin

priority lands vulnerable to development priority lands 
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

Connecting Communities to Parks

restoring environmental function

Baltimore

-Washington Parkway

Addressing storm water run off, re-creating 

wetlands and day-lighting Quincy Run

implementing Cheverly’s GreenPlan using a GI approach
NPS Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program

In the beginner's mind there 

are many possibilities; in the 

expert's mind there are few.

-Shunryu Suzuki
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. A N TO N I O RU I Z- CA M PO S, D e f

e n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 07- 30318 D. C . No . C R - 0 7 - 0 5 0 5 1 - F DB ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on F r ankl i n D . B ur ge s s , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d M ay25, 2010 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , T H O M A S , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A n to n io R u iz - C a m p o s ap p e a ls f r o m h is g u ilty - p le ac o n v ic tio n a n d8 4 - m o n th se nt ence for c on spi ra cyt o d i stribu t e c ocai ne base and d i stribu t i on of cocai ne base , i n vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) a nd ( b) ( 1) ( A ) . P ur s uantt o A nder s v . 

# FI LED JU N 22 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 30318 2 Ca lifo rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 1967) , R ui z - C a m pos ’ c ouns e l ha s f i l e d abr i e f

s t a t i ng the r e ar e no gr ounds f

orr e l i e f , a l ong w i th am ot i on t o w i thdr aw a s c ouns e l of reco rd . W e h av e p ro v i d edth e ap p el l an tw i th th e o p p o rtu n i ty t o fi l e a p ro se supp l em ent albri ef

. N o p ro se supp l em ent albri ef or answ er i ng bri ef

has bee n f i l e d. O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the r e c or d pur s uantt o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U . S. 7 5 , 8 0 - 8 1 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s n o a r g u ab le g r o u n d s f o rr e lie f o n d ir e c t ap p e a l. A cco rd i n g l y, co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , and the di stri ct co u rt ’ s j u d g m en ti s A FFI R M ED .
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 101

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the

fiscal year 1998, and for other purposes.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 101

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

1998, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That section 106(3) of Public Law 105–46 is further

4 amended by striking ‘‘November 7, 1997’’ and inserting
2

•HJ 101 EH

1 in lieu thereof ‘‘November 9, 1997’’, and each provision

2 amended by sections 122 and 123 of such public law shall

3 be applied as if ‘‘November 9, 1997’’ was substituted for

4 ‘‘October 23, 1997’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 7,

1997.

Attest:

Clerk.
No. 11-9896.

#### Jones *v.*Liberty Bank & Trust Co. et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *informa*
      *931
      *pauperis*denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court’s Rule 39.8.
# Journal officiel C 114A/28 m

| | ISSN 1977-0936 |
| --- | --- |
| Journal officiel
  de l'Union européenne | C 114A |
| | |
| Édition de langue française | Communications et informations | 61e année28 mars 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0936

Journal officiel

de l'Union européenne

C 114A

Édition de langue française

Communications et informations

61e année28 mars 2018

---

| Numéro d'information | Sommaire | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Avis |
| | PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES |
| | Parlement européen |
| 2018/C 114 A/01 | Procédure de sélection PE/199/S — Agent temporaire — Attaché de direction (AD 5) — Liste d’aptitude | 1 |

Numéro d'information

Sommaire

page

V   Avis

PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES

Parlement européen

2018/C 114 A/01

Procédure de sélection PE/199/S — Agent temporaire — Attaché de direction (AD 5) — Liste d’aptitude

1

---

| FR | |
| --- | --- |

FR

---

V Avis

PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES

Parlement européen

| 28.3.2018 | FR | Journal officiel de l'Union européenne | CA 114/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.3.2018

FR

Journal officiel de l'Union européenne

CA 114/1

---

PROCÉDURE DE SÉLECTION PE/199/S

Agent temporaire — Attaché de direction (AD 5)

LISTE D’APTITUDE

(2018/C 114 A/01)

| 1. | FISCHER, Jessica Isabell |
| --- | --- |

1.

FISCHER, Jessica Isabell

| 2. | LEMAIRE, Cléo |
| --- | --- |

2.

LEMAIRE, Cléo

| 3. | COURTADE, Christelle |
| --- | --- |

3.

COURTADE, Christelle

La validité de la liste d’aptitude expirera le 31 décembre 2020.

---
First Amendment to 2006 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN



 Exhibit 10.16 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO 

SUMMIT FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. 

2006 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN, AS AMENDED 

WHEREAS, Summit Financial Services Group, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Summit Financial Services Group,
Inc. 2006 Incentive Compensation Plan, as amended (the “Plan”); 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 10(e) of
the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) may amend the Plan; and 
 WHEREAS, the Board
desires to amend the Plan as set forth herein to enhance the rights of stock option holders in connection with a Change in Control of the Company. 

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Section 10(e) of the Plan, effective as of November 16, 2013, Section 9(a) of the
Plan is hereby amended to: 
  

	 	1.	delete the word “and” at the end of sub-section (v); 

  

	 	2.	replace the period at the end of sub-section (vi) with “; and”; and 

  

	 	3.	add a new sub-section (vii) to read as follows: 

 “(vii) if the Board provides that
Options shall terminate in accordance with sub-section (a)(v) above, then the Board may also in its sole and absolute discretion, provide that all such Options that are outstanding and unexercised immediately prior to a Change in Control will, by
virtue of the Change in Control and without any action on the part of the Company, the holder of the Option or any other Person, entitle the holder of the Option to a payment determined as if such holder had converted and exchanged the shares of
Stock subject to the Option for the consideration payable in the Change in Control transaction and, in connection with such deemed conversion and exchange, had (A) relinquished a portion of such consideration with respect to that number of
shares of Stock corresponding to the quotient obtained by dividing (x) the aggregate exercise price for the shares of Stock subject to such Option by (y) the Company Trading Price, (B) further relinquished a portion of such
consideration payable with respect to that number of shares of Stock corresponding the quotient obtained by dividing (x) the aggregate minimum statutory withholding requirements by (y) the Company Trading Price, and (C) received the
remaining consideration. For the purpose of this Section, “Company Trading Price” means the closing sale price per share of the Stock as reported by Bloomberg L.P. on the trading day immediately prior to the closing date of the
Change in Control transaction, or, if the Stock was not traded on such day, the last trading day on which the Stock was traded; provided, however, that, if the Stock was traded on a certain date, but the trading price of a share of
Stock was not reported by Bloomberg L.P. for such date, then the parties to the Change in Control transaction shall in good faith select another authoritative source to determine such trading price on such date.” 

[Signature page follows.] 







 
			
	 SUMMIT FINANCIAL SERVICES

GROUP, INC.

		
	By:	 	 /s/ Marshall Leeds

	Name:	 	Marshall Leeds
	Title:	 	President


 [SIGNATURE PAGE TO AMENDMENT TO 2006 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN]
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8264 

To amend chapter 2003 of title 54, United States Code, to protect majority 

federally owned counties from loss of taxable acreage, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2020 

Mr. GOSAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend chapter 2003 of title 54, United States Code, 

to protect majority federally owned counties from loss 

of taxable acreage, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NO NET LOSS OF TAXABLE ACREAGE. 

4 (a) AMENDMENT.—Chapter 2003 of title 54, United 

5 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘§ 200311. No net loss of taxable acreage. 

8 ‘‘Amounts from the Fund may not be used by the 

9 Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture 

10 to acquire private land within a county in which 50 perVerDate Sep 11 2014 18:44 Sep 25, 2020 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H8264.IH H8264

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8264 IH

1 cent or more of the land is owned by the Federal Govern2 ment, unless the Secretary acquiring the private land dis3 poses of an equal amount of federally owned land within 

4 that county during the same fiscal year to ensure no net 

5 loss of private, taxable acreage in that county.’’. 

6 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

7 for chapter 2003 of title 54, United States Code, is 

8 amended by adding after the item relating to section 

9 200310 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 200311. No net loss of taxable acreage.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
# Επίσημη Εφημερίδα C 113A/27 Μ

| | ISSN 1977-0901 |
| --- | --- |
| Επίσημη Εφημερίδα
  της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης | C 113A |
| | |
| Έκδοση στην ελληνική γλώσσα | Ανακοινώσεις και Πληροφορίες | 61ό έτος27 Μαρτίου 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0901

Επίσημη Εφημερίδα

της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

C 113A

Έκδοση στην ελληνική γλώσσα

Ανακοινώσεις και Πληροφορίες

61ό έτος27 Μαρτίου 2018

---

| Ανακοίνωση αριθ | Περιεχόμενα | Σελίδα |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Γνωστοποιήσεις |
| | ΔΙΟΙΚΗΤΙΚΕΣ ΔΙΑΔΙΚΑΣΙΕΣ |
| | Ευρωπαϊκή Υπηρεσία Επιλογής Προσωπικού (EPSO) |
| 2018/C 113 A/01 | Εφεδρικός πίνακας — Γενικός διαγωνισμός EPSO/AD/333/16 — Γλωσσομαθείς νομικοί (AD 7) ελληνικής γλώσσας (EL) | 1 |

Ανακοίνωση αριθ

Περιεχόμενα

Σελίδα

V   Γνωστοποιήσεις

ΔΙΟΙΚΗΤΙΚΕΣ ΔΙΑΔΙΚΑΣΙΕΣ

Ευρωπαϊκή Υπηρεσία Επιλογής Προσωπικού (EPSO)

2018/C 113 A/01

Εφεδρικός πίνακας — Γενικός διαγωνισμός EPSO/AD/333/16 — Γλωσσομαθείς νομικοί (AD 7) ελληνικής γλώσσας (EL)

1

---

| EL | |
| --- | --- |

EL

---

V Γνωστοποιήσεις

ΔΙΟΙΚΗΤΙΚΕΣ ΔΙΑΔΙΚΑΣΙΕΣ

Ευρωπαϊκή Υπηρεσία Επιλογής Προσωπικού (EPSO)

| 27.3.2018 | EL | Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης | CA 113/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2018

EL

Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

CA 113/1

---

ΕΦΕΔΡΙΚΌΣ ΠΊΝΑΚΑΣ (1)

Γενικός διαγωνισμός EPSO/AD/333/16

Γλωσσομαθείς νομικοί (AD 7) ελληνικής γλώσσας (EL)

(2018/C 113 A/01)

| KAPSALI | Vasiliki |
| --- | --- |
| KREMEZIS | Spyridon Nikolaos |
| PANTAZIS | Dimitrios |
| PAPANDREOU | Marios |
| SARTZETAKIS | Antonios |
| STRATAKIS | Sofoklis |
| ZANNAS | Ioannis |

KAPSALI

Vasiliki

KREMEZIS

Spyridon Nikolaos

PANTAZIS

Dimitrios

PAPANDREOU

Marios

SARTZETAKIS

Antonios

STRATAKIS

Sofoklis

ZANNAS

Ioannis

Η ισχύς των εφεδρικών πινάκων λήγει στις 30.6.2021.

---

(1)  Οι επιτυχόντες στον διαγωνισμό μπορούν να ζητήσουν να μη δημοσιευθεί το όνομά τους.

---
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-10443 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus DEREK GLEN ADKINS, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:95-CV-2104-D

- - - - - - - - - - February 21, 1997 Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Derek Glen Adkins, #24400-077, filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence by a person in federal custody under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 asserting that the district court erred in accepting his guilty plea prior to determining his exact sentence, that his counsel was ineffective for giving him incorrect information with respect to the length of his sentence, and that the Government had breached the plea agreement. UnderNo. 96-10443 - 2 - the law of the case doctrine, neither the district court on remand nor the appellate court on a subsequent appeal may reexamine the issues decided previously on appeal. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Traillour Oil Co. , 987 F.2d 1138, 1150 (5th Cir. 1993); United States v. Singleton , 49 F.3d 129, 134 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 324 (1995). Issues decided on the previous appeal, either expressly or by necessary implication, are binding on remand and on any subsequent appeal. Id

. In the direct appeal of this conviction, this court held that the district court did not err in accepting the guilty plea because Adkins’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. United States v. Adkins , No. 94-10120 (5th Cir. Dec. 28, 1994) (unpublished). The Government did not breach the agreement not to seek enhancement for prior drug offenses. Application of the career offender provisions of the guidelines is not the same as seeking an increase in the statutory range of punishment that an enhancement entails. Id

. The claim that his counsel was ineffective for inducing Adkins to plead guilty with a prediction of his sentence is without merit because Adkins has shown no prejudice. See Hill v. Lockhart , 474 U.S. 52, 57-59 (1985).
AFFIRMED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

KIMBERLY CRAWFORD,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10205

D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00547-RLH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Roger L. Hunt, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 21, 2015**

Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Kimberly Crawford appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges 

the 11-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Crawford contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to 

 

*

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).

FILED

JAN 27 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 14-10205

explain adequately its reasons for rejecting her sentencing arguments. We review 

for plain error, see United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), and 

find none. The record reflects that the court considered Crawford’s arguments and 

sufficiently explained the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992

(9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).

Crawford next contends that her sentence is substantively unreasonable in 

light of her history of addiction and her rehabilitative efforts. The district court did 

not abuse its discretion in imposing Crawford’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 

552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 

U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including 

Crawford’s multiple violations of supervised release and the need to afford adequate 

deterrence. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. 

AFFIRMED.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2

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 Form 10-Q of Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Noven)
for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Diane M. Barrett, Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of Noven, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

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

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

/s/ Diane M. Barrett

Name: Diane M. Barrett
Title: Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Date: August 14, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Noven
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
I)ISMISS; Opinion tiled October 10, 2012

In The

Q.tnirt uf pn1a1i

fiftIi IhitricI uf !ixa it E1at1n

No. 05-10-01610-CV

EARTH ENERGY UTILiTY CORPORATION, Appellant

V.

ENVIRONMENTALLY ENGINEERED EQUIPMENT, INC.

AND DOYLE A. REVIS, Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-09-08147

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Francis and Lang-Miers

opinion By Chief Justice Wright

On June 4. 2012. the Court granted the agreed motion to withdraw filed by counsel for

appellant. We instructed appellant to notify this Court ofthe name, State Bar Number, address, and

telephone number ofnew counsel. By order dated June 28.2012. the Court granted appellant a fortyfive da extension oftime to provide this Court with the information regarding new counsel. In that

order, the Court cautioned appellant that failure to provide the information regarding new counsel

within the time specified would result in dismissal of the appeal. As of today’s date, appellant has

not provided the requested information.

A corporation may only appear in this Court through counsel. See Kunstoplast ofAm., Inc.
v. f’ortnosa Plastics Corp., 937 S.w2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1996) (per curiam). Appellant has failed to

notify the Court that it has retained counsel. For this reason, we dismiss the appeal. S’e Ttx. R.

j\ip P 4 3(c)

-r

CAROL ‘WRICil-U

CHIEI/4US1 fCf

10161 OF.P05
Qiiiirt uf pt’ra1

ifti! Iitrirt uf xzu at 1alla

JUDGMENT

P A R T II F N H R G Y U T I F I T Y Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

CORPORATION. Appellant of Dallas County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. CC-09-

08147).

No. 05-10-01 61 0-CV V. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright,

Justices Francis and Lang-Miers.

ENVIRONMENTALLY ENGINEERED participating.

EQUIPMENT, INC. ANI) DOYLE A.

REVIS, Appellees

Based on the Courts opinion of this date. the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellees. Environmentally Engineered Equipment. Inc. and Doyle A.

Revis, recover their costs of the appeal from appellant, Earth Energy Utility Corporation.

Judgment entered October 10, 2012.

CAROL’t N WRIGI 7IT

Cl lIEJflCI/
No. 11-9686.

#### Oliphant *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.