alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion filed December 1 , 2011



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________



### No. 11

- 1 1

- 00 266

- CV

__________

IN THE INTEREST OF W.M.C., A CHILD

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Nolan County, Texas

T rial Court Cause No. CC

- 6349

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A.M.C. filed a pro se “Notice of A ppeal ” from a master’s order regarding child custody.

In her notice of appeal, A.M.C. requested a trial de novo. After reviewing the notice of appeal

and the documents on file in this court, the clerk of this court wrote A.M.C. and notified her that

it appeared to this court that the notice of appeal had been inadvertently filed in this court ; that

the notice of appeal was in substance a request for a t rial de novo hearing before the referring

court from an associate judge’s order and was not a notice of appeal from a final, appealable

order; and that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See T EX

. F AM

. C ODE

A NN

. § 201.015 (West Supp. 2011) . We requested that A.M.C. respond in writing and show

grounds for continuing this appeal. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3 . A.M.C. has not responded

.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal

.

December 1 , 2011 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Kalenak , J.
Form 10-QSB
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d)
Of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For Quarter Ended December 31, 1996
Commission File Number 33-16531-D

International Automated Systems, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Utah87-0447580
(State or other jusrisdiction of(IRS Employer
incorporation or organization)Identification No.)

512 South 860 East
American Fork, Utah 84003
(Address of principal executive offices)

Registrant's telephone number
including area code(801) 763-9965

Not applicable
Former Address, if changed since last report

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has
filed all reports required to be filed by 
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 during the proceeding 12 months (or
such shorter period that the registrant was required to
file such reports) and (2) has been subject
to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes x
     No
As of December 31, 1996 registrant had 15,186,100
shares of common stock, no par value per
share, issued and outstanding after deducting shares 
held in the corporate treasury and one million 
shares of Series 1 Class A Preferred Stock, no par 
value per share.
<PAGE>Signatures

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the 
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the 
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Date3-3-97

International Automated Systems, Inc.

By _______________________________________
Neldon Johnson
President and Chief Executive Officer


By _______________________________________
Neldon Johnson
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from financial
statements, schedules and other disclosure contained in Form 10-K for the year
ended September 30, 2000 of B. F. Saul Real Estate Investment Trust and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements, schedules
and other disclosure.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                                  1000

<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                           SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                                       18129
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 0
<PP&E>                                                      402149
<DEPRECIATION>                                              124184
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            0
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     0
<SALES>                                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            141563
<CGS>                                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                70380
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             27955
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           47149
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                              (3921)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     0
<EPS-BASIC>                                                      0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    0


</TABLE>
# Data for Table B8

# RSEs for Table B8
No. 67,819

#### In the Matter of Paul W. Dwight, *Respondent.*

(290 P.3d 247)

On July 10,1992, this court suspended the respondent, Paul W. Dwight, from the practice of law in Kansas for a period of 1 year. See *In re Dwight,*251 Kan. 588, 834 P.2d 382 (1992). Before reinstatement, the respondent was required to pay the costs of the disciplinary action and comply with Supreme Court Rule 218 (2011 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 379).

On November 20, 2012, the respondent filed a renewed petition for reinstatement with this court for reinstatement to the practice of law in Kansas. The renewed petition was referred to the Disciplinary Administrator for consideration by the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 219 (2011 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 380). The Disciplinary Administrator affirmed that the respondent met all requirements set forth by the court.

The court, after carefully considering the record, grants the respondent’s petition for reinstatement.

It Is Therefore Ordered that the respondent be reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Kansas conditioned upon his compliance with the annual continuing legal education requirements and upon his payment of all fees required by the Clerk of the Appellate Courts and the Kansas Continuing Legal Education Commission. When the respondent has complied with the annual continuing legal education requirements and has paid the fees required by the Clerk of the Appellate Courts and the Kansas Continuing Legal Education Commission, the Clerk is directed to enter respondent’s name upon the roster of attorneys engaged in the practice of law in Kansas.

It Is Further Ordered that this order of reinstatement of Paul W. Dwight shall be published in the Kansas Reports, and the *2costs of the reinstatement proceedings are assessed to the respondent.

Dated this 12th day of December, 2012.
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 International Automated Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Neldon Johnson, Chief Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



(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.







/s/ Neldon Johnson



Neldon Johnson

Chief Executive Officer

May 21, 2004





---





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 International Automated Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, LaGrand T. Johnson, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



(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.







/s/ LaGrand T. Johnson



LaGrand T. Johnson

Chief Financial Officer

May 21, 2004
EXHIBIT 23



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTANTS



We have issued our report dated
January 24, 2003, except for Notes 1A, 6A, 6B, 16 and 17 as to which the date is February 28, 2003 and Note 21 as to which the date is March 28, 2003, accompanying the consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of Refac and
Subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statement (From S-8 No. 333-76085) pertaining to the Stock Option and Incentive Plans of Refac and
Subsidiaries.





|GRANT THORNTON LLP
|------------------
|New York, New York
|March 28, 2003
# m94_26
# C_2018403EN.01001001.xml

| 9.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 403/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 403/10

---

Commission notice amending the European Union Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas 2014 to 2020

(2018/C 403/06)

The European Union Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas 2014 to 2020 (1) are amended as follows, in order to better address certain environmental policy considerations:

| (1) | point (155) is replaced by the following:
  ‘As regards investment with preventive objectives in point (143)(e), the maximum aid intensity must not exceed 80 %. However, it may be increased up to 100 % if the investment is carried out collectively by more than one beneficiary or if the objective is to prevent damage caused by protected animals.’; |
| --- | --- |

(1)

point (155) is replaced by the following:

‘As regards investment with preventive objectives in point (143)(e), the maximum aid intensity must not exceed 80 %. However, it may be increased up to 100 % if the investment is carried out collectively by more than one beneficiary or if the objective is to prevent damage caused by protected animals.’;

| (2) | point (402) is deleted.; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

point (402) is deleted.;

| (3) | point (403) is replaced by the following:
  ‘The aid and any other payments received to compensate for the damage, including payments under other national or Union measures or insurance policies for the damage receiving aid, must be limited to 100 % of the eligible costs.’. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

point (403) is replaced by the following:

‘The aid and any other payments received to compensate for the damage, including payments under other national or Union measures or insurance policies for the damage receiving aid, must be limited to 100 % of the eligible costs.’.

---

(1)  OJ C 204, 1.7.2014, p. 1.

---
Order entered October 31 , 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 22

- 01091

- CR

DANIEL PAUL RAY , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 77th Dis trict Court Limestone County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 15487

- A

O RDER

Before the Court is th e October 27, 2022 request of court reporter Judith G.

Werlinger for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record. We GRANT the

request and ORDER the repo rter’s record filed by November 14, 2022

.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE
#### Coleman v. State

106,003

08/29/13

Denied.

Unpublished
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00286-CV

IN RE B.U. RELATOR

----------

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

TRIAL COURT NO. 2006-20830-158

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

The court has considered relator’s “Original Proceeding arising out of the 

158th Judicial District Court of Denton County, Texas for Expedited Peremptory 

Writ of Mandamus, Prohibition, and Habeas Corpus with Request for Emergency 

Temporary Orders and for Further Relief with Affidavits attached in Support

Thereof” and is of the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s 

“Original Proceeding arising out of the 158th Judicial District Court of Denton 

County, Texas for Expedited Peremptory Writ of Mandamus, Prohibition, and 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

Habeas Corpus with Request for Emergency Temporary Orders and for Further 

Relief with Affidavits attached in Support Thereof” is denied.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEIER, WALKER, and SUDDERTH, JJ.

DELIVERED: August 16, 2016
Air Açores

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20590

To Whom It May Concern

Head Office

Av. Infante D. Henrique, 55

9504 – 528 Ponta Delgada

Açores Portugal

Telf: 351 296 209 710/1

Fax: +351 296 672 090

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 787

SATA Air Açores is an airline based in the Azores, Portugal, which operates scheduled regional passenger 

and cargo air services within the Azores and Madeira islands. 

SATA Air Açores wishes to register its support for the IATA’s filing of Resolution 787 and kindly requests

that the DOT approves the new IATA Resolution 787.

It is SATA Air Açores understanding that the New Distribution Capability will benefit all stakeholders on 

the airline distribution business, including the consumer, and at the same allow for a more open, 

innovative, agile and competitive environment.

The present and traditional distribution model constrains the capability for an airline to distribute its 

products. Today the basic product of an airline is completely commoditized and this requires a new 

business reality, in terms of airline passenger distribution, allowing for total visibility over the airline offer 

to a consumer – the offer is not only based on price but on value to the consumer.

SATA Air Açores would like to submit the additional comments:

 The current model for the transmission of data between airline and its partners is outdated and 

doesn’t allow for the full information to be presented to the consumer, neither allows the 

existence of an open communication environment – the current standards are prior to the 

existence of the internet.

 The adoption of an open standard based on XML data transmission allows a more easier, faster 

and cheaper way for airlines to integrate with partners and at the same time provides customers 

with more information on fare alternatives (based on value and not on cost), additional services, 

on board amenities and others.

 The usage of a standard XML will allow airlines with less resources (like ours) to be able to 

integrate their products with business partners in a more direct and cost effective manner.

 Airlines are not able to communicate their products on the indirect channels in the same way they 

are on their own web sites – this generates a huge competitive disadvantage for airlines with less 

marketing resources.

 The Resolution 787 establishes a standard shared by all stakeholders. The internet as it is today 

makes this a well proven approach.

 The implementation of systems supported by the NDC will both allow customers to have 

transparency and access to the full information on the products they looking at and 

comparability with the offer of competitive airlines.

Yours sincerely,

Paulo Ornelas

IT Director
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 2, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15653-15654]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8377]


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


DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce (DOC) has submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for 
collection of information under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). This collection has been submitted under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act's emergency processing procedures.
    Agency: Technology Administration.
    Title: National Medal of Technology Nomination Applications.

[[Page 15654]]

    Agency Form Number: None.
    OMB Approval Number: 0692-0001.
    Type of Request: Reinstatement of a previously approved 
collection--Emergency Review Requested.
    Burden: 375 hours.
    Avg. Hrs. Per Response: 3 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 125.
    Needs and Uses: The National Medal of Technology is the highest 
honor awarded by the President of the United States to America's 
leading innovators. This Award is bestowed upon individuals, teams, or 
companies for accomplishment in the innovation, development, and 
commercialization of technology as evidenced by the establishment of 
new or significantly improved products, processes, or services. The 
program strives to highlight the national importance of fostering 
technological innovation based upon solid science, resulting in 
commercially successful products and services. The information 
collected through the application process is used by the Technology 
Nomination Evaluation Committee for selecting nominees to be 
recommended by the Secretary of Commerce to the President for this 
Award.
    Affected Public: Individuals, businesses or other for-profit 
organizations, non-for-profit institutions, and the federal government.
    Frequency: Applications are accepted on an annual basis.
    Respondent's Obligation: Respondents voluntarily submit an 
application in order to be considered for the Award.
    OMB Desk Officer: Maya A. Bernstein (202) 395-3785.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, 
(202) 482-3272, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 5327, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Maya A. Bernstein, OMB Desk Officer, Room 
10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503. She can 
be reached at (202) 395-3785. An emergency clearance has been requested 
by April 3, 1997.

    Dated: March 27, 1997.
Linda Engelmeier,
Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office of Management and 
Organization.
[FR Doc. 97-8377 Filed 4-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-18-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**TYWAN ADAMS,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 304 WAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 30th day of December, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of** 

**Appeal is** DENIED

**.**

**Mr. Justice Eakin did not participate in the decision of t his matter.**
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                         STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION
                              OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Statement Regarding Computation of                Three months                    Six months
Per Share Earnings                               ended June 30,                  ended June 30,
                                          --------------------------      --------------------------
                                             2000            1999            2000            1999
                                          ----------      ----------      ----------      ----------
<S>                                       <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
Basic earnings per share:
 Weighted-average shares outstanding       1,655,263       1,727,128       1,655,263       1,749,006
 Net income per share                     $      .63      $      .34      $     1.16      $      .69

Weighted-average common shares
  outstanding and common share
    equivalents (1)                        1,655,263       1,727,128       1,655,263       1,749,006
                                          ----------      ----------      ----------      ----------

Net income                                $1,045,000      $  593,000      $1,922,000      $1,215,000
                                          ==========      ==========      ==========      ==========
Diluted net income per share              $      .63      $      .34      $     1.16      $      .69
                                          ==========      ==========      ==========      ==========
</TABLE>


(1)   20,000 shares of common stock equivalents were excluded from the
      computation of earnings per share for all periods presented because they
      were antidilutive.


                                 Page 13 of 14