alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DIST RICT OF TEXAS F ORT WORTH N O

. 2 - 1 0 - 1 5 0 - C V

I N R E G E R A L D A N T H O N Y W R I G H T R E L A T O R

- - - - - - - - - - - - O R I G I N A L P R O C E E D I N G

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

### M E M O R AN D U M O P I N I O N 1

- - - - - - - - - - - - T h e c o u r t h a s c o n s i d e r e d r e l a t o r ’ s p e t i t i o n f o r w r i t o f m a n d a m u s a n d i s o f t h e

o p i n i o n t h a t r e l i e f s h o u l d b e d e n i e d

. T h i s c o u r t d o e s n o t h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n t o i s s u e

a w r i t o f m a n d a m u s a g a i n s t e i t h e r o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s e x c e p t t o p r o t e c t o u r o w n j u r i s d i c t i o n

. S e e T e x

. G o v ’ t C o d e A n n

. § 2 2

. 2 2 1 ( b ) ( V e r n o n 2 0 0 4 ) ; I n r e D u n n , 1 2 0 S

. W

. 3 d 9 1 3 , 9 1 3 ( T e x

. A p p

. — T e x a r k a n a 2 0 0 3 , o r i g

. p r o c e e d i n g ) ; s e e a l s o I n r e S t i c k h a u s e n , 9 9 4 S

. W

. 2 d 9 3 6 , 9 3 6 ( T e x

. A p p

. — H o u s t o n [ 1 s t D i s t

. ] 1 9 9 9 , o r i g

. p r o c e e d i n g )

. T h i s c o u r t ’ s j u r i s d i c t i o n i s n o t a t i s s u e i n t h i s c a s e

. A c c o r d i n g l y ,
r e l a t o r ’ s p e t i t i o n f o r w r i t o f m a n d a m u s i s d e n i e d

.

1  S e e T e x

. R

. A p p

. P

. 4 7

. 4

.P E R C U R I A M

P A N E L : G A R D N E R a n d M C C O Y , J J

. D E L I V E R E D : M a y 2 0 , 2 0 1 0

2
**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 of Panda Ethanol, Inc. a Nevada corporation
      (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006, as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report"), Todd W. Carter, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies
      to
      the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




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




(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




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






/s/ Todd
              W.
              CarterTodd
                W. Carter
              Chief
                Executive Officer
              November
                17, 2006
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4805 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4805

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 105 North Quincy Street in Clinton, Illinois, as the ``Gene Vance 
                        Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 28, 2006

   Mr. Johnson of Illinois (for himself, Mr. Hastert, Mr. Kirk, Mr. 
    Emanuel, Mrs. Biggert, Mr. Lipinski, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Mr. 
  Shimkus, Mr. Weller, Mr. Costello, Mr. Gutierrez, Mr. Manzullo, Ms. 
 Bean, Mr. Evans, Mr. LaHood, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Rush, Mr. Jackson of 
   Illinois, and Mr. Hyde) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 105 North Quincy Street in Clinton, Illinois, as the ``Gene Vance 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. GENE VANCE POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 105 North Quincy Street in Clinton, Illinois, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Gene Vance Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Gene Vance 
Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATE OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his
capacity as an officer of CRT Properties, Inc. (the Company) that he has reviewed this annual report and, to the best of his knowledge and
belief, the annual report of the Company on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that the annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary in order to make the report not misleading, and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of such period and the results of operations and cash flows of the Company for such
period.


Dated: March 8, 2005



/s/ Thomas J. CrockerThomas J. CrockerChief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) CRT Properties, Inc.


Dated: March 8, 2005



/s/ Randal L. MartinRandal L. MartinController (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) CRT Properties, Inc.


82

---
exv10w112









Exhibit 10.112




Second Amendment to the

DSH #2 Building Lease Agreement



This Second Amendment to the DSH #2 Building Lease Agreement (the “Second Amendment”) is made in
Shanghai, People’s Republic of China, and effective as of November 15, 2010, by and between
SHANGHAI KAI HONG TECHNOLOGY ELECTRONIC CO., LTD. (“DSH”) and SHANGHAI YUAN HOWE ELECTRONICS CO.,
LTD. (“Yuan Howe”). DSH and Yuan Howe are collectively referred to as the “Parties” and
individually as a “Party”.




          In consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this Second Amendment, the Parties agree
as follows:




1. Definitions



Unless otherwise defined in this Second Amendment, the terms used in this Second Amendment shall
have same meaning and definition as stated in the previously agreed DSH #2 Building Lease Agreement
(the “Agreement”) and the First Amendment to the DSH #2 Building Lease Agreement (the “First
Amendment”).




2. The Extent of the Amendment



Except for those terms and conditions in the Agreement and/or the First Amendment as specifically
stated for amendment in this Second Amendment, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement
and/or the First Amendment shall remain unchanged and continue to be valid and effective.




3. Lease Period Amendment



Both Parties agree starting from November 1, 2010, DSH shall begin the actual usage of DSH #2
Building floor 4, which has an area of approximately 6,272 square meters. This Section 3 of the
Second Amendment shall not be restricted or need to abide by the “Lease Period Amendment” terms in
Section 3 of the previously agreed First Amendment.







-1-









 










4. Monthly Lease Fee



The monthly lease fee for DSH #2 Building floor 4 shall be calculated in accordance with the
monthly lease per square meter price as specified in the Section 6 of the Agreement.




5. Effective Date of the Second Amendment



This Second Amendment shall become effective after the legal representatives or authorized
representatives of both Parties affix their signatures and company seals on this Second Amendment.




6. Language of the Second Amendment



This Second Amendment is made and executed in both Chinese and English, both versions are equally
valid and effective except as otherwise prohibited under the law.




7. Complete Understanding



This Second Amendment comprises the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to its
subject matters and supersedes any previous or contemporaneous communications, representations, or
agreements, whether oral or written. For purposes of construction, this Second Amendment will be
deemed to have been drafted by both Parties. No modification of this Second Amendment will be
binding on either Party unless in writing and signed by an authorized representative of each Party.




	 	 	 
	Party A: Shanghai Kai Hong Party

	 	B: Shanghai Yuan Howe Electronic
	 
	 	 
	          Technology Co., Ltd.

	 	          Co., Ltd.
	 
	 	 
	Representative:

	 	Representative:
	 
	 	 
	Date:

	 	Date:






-2-
No. 09-7927.

#### Freddie J. Grayson, Petitioner v. California.

559 U.S. 1071, 130 S. Ct. 2091,

176 L. Ed. 2d 728,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3368.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, denied.

Same case below, 155 Cal. App. 4th 1059, 66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 603.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4986 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Homeland 

Security to prioritize maritime transportation security grants based on 

the risks and vulnerabilities of ports and the proximity of ports to 

critical infrastructure or urban or sensitive areas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 16, 2006 

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

Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to prioritize maritime transportation security grants based on the risks and 

vulnerabilities of ports and the proximity of ports to 

critical infrastructure or urban or sensitive areas. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PRIORITY IN AWARDING MARITIME TRANSPOR4 TATION SECURITY GRANTS. 

5 Subsection (a) of section 70107 of title 46, United 

6 States Code, is amended to read as follows: 

7 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.— 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4986 IH 

1 ‘‘(1) ESTABLISHMENT OF GRANT PROGRAM.— 

2 The Secretary shall establish a grant program for 

3 making a fair and equitable allocation of funds to 

4 implement Area Maritime Transportation Security 

5 Plans and facility security plans among port authori6 ties, facility operators, and State and local govern7 ment agencies required to provide port security serv8 ices. Before awarding a grant under the program, 

9 the Secretary shall provide for review and comment 

10 by the appropriate Federal Maritime Security Coor11 dinators and the Maritime Administrator. In admin12 istering the grant program, the Secretary shall take 

13 into account national economic and strategic defense 

14 concerns. 

15 ‘‘(2) PRIORITY IN AWARDING GRANTS.—In 

16 awarding a grant under the grant program estab17 lished under subsection (a), the Secretary shall 

18 prioritize port authorities, facility operators, and 

19 State or local government agencies that provide port 

20 security based on— 

21 ‘‘(A) the risks and vulnerabilities of the 

22 port for which the port authority, facility oper23 ator, or State or local government agency pro24 vides security; and 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•HR 4986 IH 

1 ‘‘(B) the proximity of such port to critical 

2 infrastructure or to an urban or sensitive 

3 area.’’. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
No. 09-764.

#### Leslie D. Mower, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 940, 130 S. Ct. 1537,

176 L. Ed. 2d 115,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1231.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

*116Same case below, 340 Fed. Appx. 515.
Exhibit 99.1

                      DELTA OIL & GAS, INC.

                    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 Delta Oil & Gas, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Pamela Starek, Principal Executive Officer and Principal
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:

(1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and
(2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.


/s/ Pamela Starek
---------------------------------------
Pamela Starek
Principal Executive Officer
Principal Financial Officer
November 14, 2003

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Delta Oil & Gas, Inc. and will be retained by
Delta Oil & Gas, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 

### Application to Amend Section 333 Exemption No. 11941 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-1415
January 28, 2016 Petitioner: Soaring Sky, LLC Ryan Cowell, GM 2180 W. 1st Street, Suite 310 Fort Myers, FL 33901 Office:**239~333-2447** Cell: 661-904-5138 Email: ryan@soaringsky.net Website: www.soaringsky.net
Greetings, By letter from the FAA dated July 2, 2015, an exemption was granted to Soaring Skyfor relief under Section 333. That letter was marked Section 333 Exemption No. 11941 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-1415. Soaring Sky hereby requests that the exemption so granted and amended, be now further amended to include the eBee from senseFiy (fixed wing aircraft). • Respecting the eBee, petitioner offers and incorporates by reference all ofthe data and analyses included in prior grants of exemption for that model aircraft such as Exemption No. 11941. Thank you for your consideration ofthis important request. Please advise us of any additional information that is required.

# :~~s.ere1y;·;.···.· 

# />

. ........**~** 

# ..·-....**.~;-(__.~ ··~** 



### L

.....-··GM, Soaring Sky, LLC
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Bobby Sewell, * From the 161st District Court

 of Ector County,

 Trial Court No. B-16-10-0948-CV.

Vs. No. 11-19-00121-CV * April 30, 2021

City of Odessa, DC Oris, Jesse Duarte, * Memorandum Opinion by Bailey, C.J. 

Daryl Smith, Leslie Goodson, (Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Joe Barrera, and Bill Carpenter, Williams, J., and Wright, S.C.J.,

sitting by assignment)

(Trotter, J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, 

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed. The costs incurred by 

reason of this appeal are taxed against Bobby Sewell.
Order filed March 3, 2020

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

__________

No. 11-20-00070-CV

__________

IN RE TEAKWOOD OPERATING, LLC

Original Mandamus Proceeding

O R D E R

Relator, Teakwood Operating, LLC, has filed in this court an emergency 

motion for temporary relief in conjunction with an original mandamus proceeding. 

These matters relate to a February 10, 2020 order in Cause No. CV56162 in the 441st 

District Court of Midland County in which the Honorable Jeffrey Todd Robnett 

granted Guggenheim Partners Investment Management, LLC; Guggenheim 

Corporate Funding, LLC; and Guggenheim Credit Services, LLC’s motion to 

disqualify Leah Rudnicki and the Rudnicki Firm as counsel for Teakwood. The 

court reporter, as of this date, has been unable to complete the reporter’s record of 

the February 7, 2020 hearing on the motion to disqualify. The court reporter has

advised this court that March 9, 2020, is the estimated date of completion of the 

record.
2

Pursuant to Rule 52.10(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, this 

court hereby orders that all trial proceedings, including the hearings set for March 6, 

2020, and the responses to discovery due on March 18, 2020, are temporarily stayed 

pending further order of this court or final disposition of this mandamus proceeding. 

Further, this court orders Teakwood Operating, LLC to provide a written update to 

the court by March 13, 2020, as to the status of the preparation of the reporter’s 

record of the February 7, 2020 hearing on the motion to disqualify.

PER CURIAM

March 3, 2020

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.1

Willson, J., not participating.

1

Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, 

sitting by assignment.
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 Terra Nostra Resources Corp.  (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jeff Reynolds, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

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



(2)

The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date:  January 23, 2006

By: /s/ Jeff Reynolds

Name: Jeff Reynolds

Title:   Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
Montana Eleventh Judicial District Court. County of Flathead.

#### *109STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, -vs- SEAN D. JORGENSON, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-13-190

Done in open Court this 18th day of November, 2016.

DATED this 8th day of December, 2016.

DECISION

On July 14, 2016, the Court revoked the Defendant’s suspended sentence for violation of the conditions of probation and sentenced the Defendant to the Montana State Prison for a term of five (5) years, for the offense of Count I: Criminal Endangerment, a Felony, in violation of §45-5-207, MCA. The Court recommended that Defendant be considered for placement at the Intensive Treatment Unit followed by placement at the NEXUS program followed by placement at an appropriate Pre-Release Center. It was further ordered that the Defendant must comply with all requirements imposed by the Court’s Judgment of March 6, 2014. The Court granted the defendant credit for forty-five (45) days served in custody pending final disposition in this matter.

On November 18, 2016, the Defendant’s Application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court (hereafter “the Division”).

The Defendant was present and was represented by Brent Getty of the Office of the State Public Defender. The State was not represented.

Before hearing the Application, the Defendant was advised that the Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The Defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Division. The Defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 12, Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana, provides that, “The sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct. The sentence shall not be reduced or increased unless it is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.” (Section 46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Division that the sentence is AFFIRMED.

Hon. Brenda Gilbert, Chairperson, Hon. Brad Newman, Member and Hon. Kathy Seeley, Member.
No. 09-9598.

#### Selvin Aguilar Discua, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1081, 130 S. Ct. 2124,

176 L. Ed. 2d 747,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3260.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 332 Fed. Appx. 78.
ex10.1

 

 EXHIBIT 10.1
 

 

 To______________
 

  ____, 2012
 

 It is the desire of Entest Biomedical, Inc. (the “Company”) to reward your services on behalf of the Company through the issuance of _________ common shares of the Company as a Bonus (“Bonus Shares”).
 

 These Bonus Shares are issued pursuant to the following terms and conditions:
 

 The Bonus Shares shall be issued in certificate form in your name
 

 By taking possession of the Bonus Shares, you agree that you will not offer to sell, sell, transfer, pledge or otherwise dispose of the Bonus Shares prior to April 2, 2017 (“Restricted Period”).
 

 FOR EMPLOYEES: You also agree that in the event that, prior to the expiration of the Restricted Period,   you voluntarily cease to be employed at the Company or are terminated for cause the Bonus Shares shall be forfeited. 
 

 FOR CONSULTANTS: You also agree that in the event that, prior to the expiration of the Restricted Period,   you decline to provide if requested to provide, or are unable to provide if requested to provide,  consulting services to the Company of a nature that have been  customarily  provided by you to the Company the Bonus Shares shall be forfeited.
 

 You have been made aware that the Bonus Shares have not been registered under the Securities Law of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Laws of any State.
 

 The Bonus Shares shall be issued with the following restrictive legend:
 

 THESE SECURITIES MAY NOT BE OFFERED, SOLD, ASSIGNED, PLEDGED, TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE DISPOSED OF PRIOR TO APRIL 2, 2017 (“RESTRICTION PERIOD”). 
 

 THESE SECURITIES HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED (THE “ACT”), OR SECURITIES LAWS OF ANY STATE AND , SUBSEQUENT TO THE RESTRICTION PERIOD, MAY NOT BE OFFERED, SOLD, ASSIGNED, PLEDGED, TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE DISPOSED OF IN THE ABSENCE OF AN EFFECTIVE REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE ACT AND APPLICABLE STATE SECURITIES LAWS OR PURSUANT TO AN AVAILABLE EXEMPTION FROM REGISTRATION UNDER THE ACT OR SUCH LAWS  AND, IF REQUESTED BY THE COMPANY, UPON DELIVERY OF AN OPINION OF COUNSEL REASONABLY SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE PROPOSED TRANSFER IS EXEMPT FROM THE ACT OR SUCH LAWS.
 

 You are informed that stop transfer instructions shall be given to the Company’s transfer agent to assure compliance with the foregoing restrictions
 

 _________________
 David Koos, 
 Chairman and CEO
 

 Accepted By:_________________