alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## NUMBER 13

- 2 1

- 00 342

- C V

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

ANTHONY LEO SHERIDAN AND

CCS ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.

, Appellant s

,

v.

KELLI D. WILLIAMS,

MICHAEL RICHARDSON, AND

SCOUTVIEW SPORTS

, Appellee s

.

On appeal from the 26 th District Court

of Williamson County, Texas.



## ORDER TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Silva

Order Per Curiam

This cause is currently before the Court on appellant’s third motion for extension

of time to file brief

. The Court, having fully examined and considered the extensions2 previously granted in this cause and appellant’s pending motion

, i s of the opinion that the

extension requested should be granted by Order.

Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file a brief is granted. It is therefore

ordered that the Honorable Darwin McKee , counsel for appellant, file appella nt’s brief with

this Court on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 17 , 2022

. A ppellant is reminded the Court

may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless appellant complies with this order

or timely requests an extension which reasonably explains the failure and the appellee is

not significantly injured by the appellant’s failure to timely file a brief. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P.

38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c).

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the

22nd day of August, 2022.
|                                                                           
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                             
|View History:                                                              
|                                                                           
|Liquefied U.S. Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Brazil (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|Liquefied U.S. Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Brazil (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |         |         |        |        |        | 0      | 9,196  | 17,648 | 35,645 | 54,298
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 111,826 | 307,714 | 71,998 | 38,595 |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       2,471,362
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  143,071
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,225
<INVENTORY>                                    330,122
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,042,796
<PP&E>                                       1,994,125
<DEPRECIATION>                                 208,274
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,828,647
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          551,158
<BONDS>                                        504,670
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,339,274
<OTHER-SE>                                 (4,629,285)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,828,647
<SALES>                                      1,048,806
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,048,806
<CGS>                                        1,232,502
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,232,502
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,758,234
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                56,065
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             444,779
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,312,760)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,312,760)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (268,810)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,581,570)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.85)


</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JOSE MARTINEZ

,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 7

- 00165

- C R

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 1

of El Paso County , Texas

(TC# 20160C07540 )

O R D E R

Appellant is represented on appeal by the Honorable Ruben Morales who was elected to

serve as the Judge of the County Court at Law No. 7 of El Paso County, Texas. Judge Morales’

term began on January 1, 2019. Judge Morales can no longer serve as appointed appellate counsel

for Appellant . While the Appellant’s brief has been filed, the appeal has not been resolved and

Appellant is entitled to be represented by counsel. Accordingly

, the trial court is ordered to appoint

counsel to represent Appell ant through the conclusion of this appeal. The order of appointment

shall be filed with the trial court clerk within fifteen days from the date of this order. Further, the

trial court clerk is ordered to prepare and file a supplemental clerk’s record con taining the

appointment order within ten days after the order is filed with the trial court clerk.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 11 th day of January

, 20 1 9

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Van Tassell, Jr, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 377]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered March 13, 2003, convicting him of criminal contempt in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which *656could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Altman, J.P., S. Miller, McGinity, Adams and Mastro, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection withthe Annual Report on Form 10-K of Natrol, Inc. (the “Company”)for the period ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on March 31, 2007 (the “Report”), the undersigned, inthe capacity and on the date listed below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, that:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

This Certification isprovided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and Item 601(b)(32) ofRegulation S-K promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, andshall not be deemed part of the Report or “filed” for any purpose whatsoever,nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing under theSecurities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Date: March 31,2007

|        | /s/ WAYNE BOS                                      |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   | Wayne Bos                                          |
|   | *President,  Chief Executive Officer and Chairman* |
|   | *(Principal  Executive Officer)*                   |

 

----
|                                                                         
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                         
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:                                                            
|                                                                         
|Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Israel (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         
|                                                                         
|Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Israel (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar   | Apr   | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep   | Oct | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | ----- | ----- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ----- | --- | --- | ---
|2020                                                                                                                              |     |     | 3,197 |       |     |     |     |     | 3,041 |     |     |    
|2021                                                                                                                              |     |     | 2,826 | 3,225 |     |     |     |     | 2,855 |     |     |    
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
|                                                                                            
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                              
|View History:                                                                               
|                                                                                            
|Price of Calais, ME Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|Price of Calais, ME Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | --     | --     | 5.62  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 4.53   | 4.46   | 4.30   | 8.45   | 6.22   | 3.23   | 3.13   | 4.84   | 5.54   | 3.58  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 2.61   | 5.01   | 8.78   | 3.78   |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, Ann C. W. Green, certify that:

 

1.        I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Chase Packaging Corporation;

 

2.        Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 

 
| Date:   April 22, 2011 | By:    | /s/   Ann C. W. Green                          |
|-----------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------|
|                        |   | Ann   C. W. Green                              |
|                        |   | Chief   Financial Officer                      |
|                        |   | (Principal   Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

1

----
S. 1402

One Hundred Third Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four

An Act

To convey a certain parcel of public land to the County of Twin Falls, Idaho,

for use as a landfill, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Twin Falls County Landfill

Act of 1994’’.

SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE.

(a) Effective on the tender by the County of Twin Falls, Idaho,

of the fair market value for the lands described in subsection

(b) to the Secretary of the Interior, all right, title, and interest

in and to such lands, except for subsurface minerals which are

reserved to the United States, is transferred by operation of law

to the County of Twin Falls. The Secretary shall evidence such

conveyance as soon as possible thereafter by appropriate quitclaim

deed.

(b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The lands to be conveyed pursuant

to section 2 of this Act comprise approximately 1083.77 acres of

Federal lands described as the SE1⁄4SW1⁄4SE1⁄4, S1⁄2SE1⁄4SE1⁄4 of

section 31; W1⁄2, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 of section 32; Township 11 South,

Range 17 East, Boise Meridian and the West Half of Lot 2, Lot

3, Lot 4, W1⁄2SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, S1⁄2NW1⁄4, SW1⁄4 and the W1⁄2W1⁄2SE1⁄4

of section 5; Lot 1, East Half of Lot 2, E1⁄2SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, SE1⁄4NE1⁄4, E1⁄2W1⁄2SE1⁄4, and the E1⁄2SE1⁄4 of section 6; N1⁄2NE1⁄4NE1⁄4, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4NE1⁄4 of section 7; NW1⁄4NW1⁄4NE1⁄4, N1⁄2N1⁄2NW1⁄4 of

section 8; of Township 12 South, Range 17 East, Boise Meridian.
S. 1402—2

(c) Subject to valid existing rights, the lands referred to in

subsection (b) are withdrawn from location, entry, and patent under

the United States mining laws and from disposition under all

laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal leasing, and mineral

materials, and all amendments thereto.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.10

                                January 31, 2001

Mr. William P. Fricks
2327 West Island Road
Williamsburg, Virginia 23185

Dear Bill:

      Set forth below is a modified Section 8 to your Amended Employment
Agreement dated February 4, 1999 ("Agreement"). This modification supersedes the
current Section 8 in your Agreement and reflects the changes approved by the
Compensation Committee at its December 11, 2000 meeting.

      8.    Your pension benefit from the NNS qualified and non-qualified
            retirement plans, the Tenneco qualified and non-qualified retirement
            plans and this Agreement in combination will be equal to the larger
            of (a) or (b):

            (a)   60% of your Final Average Compensation (highest three out of
                  the last five years) as defined in the Newport News
                  Shipbuilding Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan.
                  (Note: Under the terms of your prior Employment Agreement you
                  have met both the age and the service requirements necessary
                  to receive this unreduced 60% pension benefit.)

            (b)   The amount of pension benefit that is the Actuarial Equivalent
                  (as defined in the Newport News Shipbuilding Inc. Retirement
                  Plan) of the pension benefit that you would have received if
                  you had elected to retire effective January 1, 2001 or, if
                  greater, as of any subsequent January 1.

            Your non-qualified benefit will be paid to you as an annuity or as a
            lump sum at your option, using the same factors that are used to
            calculate optional forms of benefits in the Newport News
            Shipbuilding Inc. Retirement Plan. However, the portions of your
            pension benefit payable from the Newport News Shipbuilding Inc.
            Retirement Plan and from the Tenneco qualified and non-qualified
            plans may not be available to you as a lump sum.

            Your rights under this Section 8 will survive termination of this
            Agreement.

      In all other respects, the Agreement will be unchanged, except that
effective January 1, 2001, you will be paid a base salary of not less than
$650,000 per year, which shall be
<PAGE>

subject to such adjustments as may be approved from time to time by the
Compensation Committee.

                                    Sincerely,


                                    Joseph J. Sisco
                                    Chairman
                                    Compensation and Benefits Committee

ACKNOWLEDGED AND ACCEPTED:


--------------------------------
William P. Fricks

On this ____ day of January 2001
No. 12-6966.

#### Tawadrous *v.*Department of the Treasury.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### J.R. v. L.T.

60 WDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

08/28/2017

FD 07-003697-004 (Allegheny)

Affirmed/Remanded
No. 12-470.

#### Alexander, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, et al. *v.*Lewis et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 18a0095n.06
No. 17-3288

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
SYLVESTER COWAN Petitioner-Appellant,

v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent-Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

BEFORE: BOGGS, BATCHELDER, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges. ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge . Sylvester Cowan appeals the district court’s dismissal of his collatera l attack on his 2003 se ntence for federal bank-robbery offenses. The sentencing court arrived at Cowan’s sentence after finding that both Cowan’s four instant offenses and at least two prior offenses qualifie d as “crimes of violence.” Cowan was adjudged a career offender under the career-offender provi sion of the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines. After having served nearly fourteen years of his sentence, Cowan challenges his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the ground s that the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) renders his current sentence unlawful and entitles him to resentencing. As a threshold matter, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f) requ ires that collateral a ttacks be timely. To satisfy this requirement, Cowan must have file d his claim within one year, running from, as relevant here, “the date on which the right as serted was initially recognized by the SupremeNo. 17-3288 Cowan v. United States

-2- Court, if that right has been newly recognized by the Suprem e Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral re view.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3). Cowan filed his claim on June 9, 2016—within one year of the Supreme Court’s decision
in Johnson . His motion for relief, however, remains untimely under § 2255(f)(3) because this circuit has explicitly held that Johnson did not recognize a right that applies to Cowan’s situation—a senten ce under the pre- Booker Sentencing Guidelines. In Raybon v. United States , 867 F.3d 625 (6th Cir. 2017), we held that a Johnson -based collateral attack of a pre- Booker sentence was untimely “because the Supreme Cour t has not decided whether the residual clause of the mandatory Sentencing Guidelines is unconstitutionally vague.” Id . at 630-31 (citation and alteration omitted)). Cowan acknowledges Raybon but argues that it was wrongly decided. Whatever merits Cowan’s argument may have, it ca nnot prevail before this pane l because “only the en banc process, a material intervening Supreme Court decision, or a releva nt change to the Guidelines permits us to override binding circuit precedent.” United States v. Verwiebe , 874 F.3d 258, 262 (6th Cir. 2017). None of these bases for devi ating from binding circuit precedent is available here. See e.g., Gipson v. United States , No. 17-5333, 2018 WL 739382, at *1 (6th Cir. Feb. 7, 2018). Accordingly, we affirm the j udgment of the district court.