alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27, 1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer. Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S. Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Whitten, Administrative Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010. Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome. NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the full texts of the opinions after they have been released electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.

The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

Board of Education of the Cleveland City School District, Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Appellee, v. Don M. Hisaka & Associaties, Inc.; United Pacific Insurance Company, Appellant. [Cite as Cleveland City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Don M. Hisaka & Assoc., Inc. (1992), Ohio St.3d .] Appeal dismissed as improvidently allowed. (No. 91-1776 -- Submitted October 21, 1992 -- Decided December 30, 1992.) Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No.

60374.

Cavitch, Familo & Durkin Co., L.P.A., Douglas A. DiPalma and E. John Brzytwa, for appellee. Weston, Hurd, Fallon, Paisley & Howley, David Arnold, Jerome W. Cook and William H. Baughman, Jr., for appellant.

This cause is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed. The court orders that the court of appeals' opinion not be published in the Ohio Official Reports, and that it may not be cited as authority except by the parties inter se. Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.
STATE v. Kenneth Russell ANTHONY

352P19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 5, 2019

David W. Andrews, Assistant Appellate Defender, For Anthony, Kenneth Russell

Sonya M. Calloway-Durham, Special Deputy Attorney General, For State of North Carolina

Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender

Brandy Cook, District Attorney, For the State of North Carolina

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th of September 2019 by Plaintiff-Appellant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of September 2019."
### 7/17/2015

Page 1 of 1



### INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

Summary Page

Chemical ID: P-15 -0559 Re viewer: Wong/EN

Endpoints-Assessed Table

Endpoints/Assessment Cycles 1 Releases

Assessed in NCEM2? Reasons for not assessing releases

No XB Testing Re quired No

Hazard Concern No

Releases Release

Below Acute Threshold 5 Release

Below Chronic Threshold 5 Other

Ingestion Surface water Ground water (landfill) Consumer Use: DtD 2

Inhalation Air: incineration (stack) Air: fugitive Consumer Use: CEM 3

Dermal Consumer Use: CEM Eco Surface water: ADR conc and/or PDM 4

Consume r Use: DtD

1 Assessment cycles are endpoint concentrations and dose calculations within the NCEM2 model.

2 Down-the-Drain

3 Consumer Exposure Model

4 Probabilistic Dilution Model

5 The threshold values for assessing endpoints are 1 mg/day for acute doses and 1 mg/year for chronic doses.

EAB DROP: Release information for this compound does not meet criteria for preparation of an exposure assessment in the Exposure Assessment Branch ’ s (EAB) Initial Review Exposure Report (this report).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7162

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ERIC ARTHUR WALTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (CR-96-41, CA-00-191-5) Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: November 22, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric Arthur Walton, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Camilletti, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although Walton did not file a notice of appeal from the district court’s order denying a certificate of appealability, we have jurisdiction to review the order because his timely filed informal brief is the functional equivalent of a notice of appeal. Smith v. Barry , 502 U.S. 244, 245 (1992). 2 PER CURIAM: Eric Arthur Walton seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and denying a certificate of appealability. * We have reviewed the record, the district court’s opi nion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge to deny § 2255 relief, and the court’s order denying a certificate of appealability. We conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Walton has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. SeeUnited States v. Walton , Nos. CR-96-41; CA-00-191-5 (N.D.W. Va. June 28, 2002; July 24, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). We grant Walton’s motion for judicial notice and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 10103 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ARNULFO GALVAN MIRELES , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:13

- CR

- 109

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and GRAVES, Circuit Judge. PER CURIAM: * Arnulfo Galvan Mireles (Galvan) appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after removal from the United States. For the first time on appeal, Galvan argues that, following Alleyne v. United States , 133 S. Ct. 21 51 (2013), any fact that increases the range of reasonable sentences must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. He asserts that the district court’s factual finding

— that he had a serious criminal

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 15, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-10103 Document: 00513194305 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/15/2015No. 15

- 10103

2 history, that his drinking posed a serious danger t o others, and that he had undertaken inappropriate contact with a victim in a prior case

— violated his constitutional rights because it likely affected the range of reasonable punishments. As Galvan did not raise this issue in the district court, we review it for plain error only. See Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). To show plain error, Galvan must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. See id. If he makes such a showing, we
have the d iscretion to correct the error, but should do so only if the error seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputa tion of judicial proceedings. See id. The Government has moved for summary affirmance on the ground that the sole issue raised by Galvan is foreclosed. In United States v. Tuma , 738 F.3d 681, 693 (5th Cir. 2013), the defendant argued that Alleyne required that any fact that increased his minimum sentence, including facts that raised his guidelines range, must be found by a j ury bey ond a reasonable doubt. This court rejected the argument, holding that Alleyne applied “only to facts that increase a statutory mandatory minimum sentence.” Id. In the present case, Galvan’s crime of conviction had no statutory minimum sentence of impri sonment, and no judicially found facts increased the statutory minimum

sentence

. See 8 U.S.C § 1326(b). Accordingly, as Galvan concedes, his argument is foreclose d. See Tuma , 738 F.3d at 693. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED. T he Government’s alternative motion to extend the time to file its brief is DENIED. AFFIRMED. Case: 15-10103 Document: 00513194305 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/15/2015
`[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5187 Reported in Senate (RS)]







                                                       Calendar No. 627
109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5187


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 26, 2006

                                Received

               August 4 (legislative day, August 3), 2006

  Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public 
                                 Works

                           September 21, 2006

               Reported by Mr. Inhofe, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT


 
    To amend the John F. Kennedy Center Act to authorize additional 
 appropriations for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts 
                         for fiscal year 2007.

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

SECTION 1. JOHN F. KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS.

    (a) Maintenance, Repair, and Security.--Section 13(a) of the John 
F. Kennedy Center Act (20 U.S.C. 76r(a)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``, 2006, and 2007.'' and 
        inserting ``and 2006; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) $19,100,000 for fiscal year 2007.''.
    (b) Capital Projects.--Section 13(b) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 76r(b)) 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``, 2006, and 2007.'' and 
        inserting ``and 2006; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.''.
                                                       Calendar No. 627

109th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5187

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To amend the John F. Kennedy Center Act to authorize additional 
 appropriations for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts 
                         for fiscal year 2007.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 21, 2006

                       Reported without amendment`
Exhibit 31.2
 
      (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and(d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date: November 15, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Martin SchneiderMartin SchneiderVice President and Principal Financial Officer E-3
No. 08-1448.

#### Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California, et al., Petitioners v. Entertainment Merchants Association, et al.

559 U.S. 1092, 130 S. Ct. 2398,

176 L. Ed. 2d 784,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3573.

April 26, 2010.

Motion of California State Senator Leland Y. Yee, et al. for leave *785to file a brief as amici curiae out of time denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit granted.

Same case below, 556 F.3d 950.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-20-00245-CV

IN THE GUARDIANSHIP OF JAMES 

ALTON TITUS, AN INCAPACITATED 

PERSON

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from Probate Court No. 1

of Tarrant County (2018-GD00180-1)

September 30, 2021

Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is reversed and we render a judgment that the order granting the bill of review 

and the corrected order are void due to lack of jurisdiction, that these orders are 

vacated, and that the bill of review proceeding is dismissed.

It is further ordered that appellee Simmons Bank shall pay all of the costs of 

this appeal, for which let execution issue.
SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By __/s/ Bonnie Sudderth________________

 Chief Justice Bonnie Sudderth
OPINION INFORMATION TO PUBLISHERS

From the Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

CASE DOCKET NUMBER: 02-20-00245-CV

NAME OF CASE: IN THE GUARDIANSHIP OF 

JAMES ALTON TITUS, AN 

INCAPACITATED PERSON

DATE OPINION FILED: SEPTEMBER 30, 2021

DATE REHEARING FILED:

TRIAL COURT: PROBATE COURT NO. 1

TRIAL COURT JUDGE: HON. CHRIS PONDER

COUNTY: TARRANT

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: THOMAS F. HARKINS, JR.

WHITAKER, CHALK, SWINDLE & 

SCHWARTZ PLLC

FORT WORTH, TX

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: DAVID BAKUTIS

R. DYANN MCCULLY

BETH HAMPTON

FORT WORTH, TX
CERTIFICATIONS

                                                                    Exhibit 31.1

I, Gregory F. Kowal, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Mera Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The Company's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

      a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
            material information relating to the Company, including its
            consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
            those entities, particularly during the period in which this
            quarterly report is being prepared;

      b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and
            procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
            this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c)    presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
            effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
            evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The Company's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the Company's auditors and the audit committee of
Company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

      a)    all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
            controls which could adversely affect the Company's ability to
            record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
            identified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in
            internal controls; and

      b)    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
            other employees who have a significant role in the Company's
            internal controls; and

6. The Company's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or
in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: February 13, 2006


/s/ Gregory F. Kowal
-----------------------
Gregory F. Kowal
Chief Executive Officer
November 4`h, 2010

To: Lisa P. Jackson Administrator United States Environment Protection Agency 

# , 2010 NOV 1? PM 3

: 36 

# Fril,~,-- .01r, Tl-;E Fr : Triple A Farms, LLC Family Farm Colfax, Wis. Dear Ms. Jackson, 

## EhirCUTN'E S~0-2 E`A,RiAT

A petition was filed in your office by the NRECA regarding the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines rule. I amwriting to you today to showour sul#o4,for the petition. f We run a farmin northwestern Wiscodsil To ensure uninterrupted operation of the farm, we purchased a 230 kW

backup generator . As an added benefit, my cooperative offers a peak shaving program

. By participating in this programour farmsees a $6,700 per year savings on our electric bill . The rules your agency are trying to implement will take away that peak alert rate my Cooperative can offer. That means $5,700 out of my pocket, towards my electric bill . In this economy, every penny counts. The money that we are saving on this program helps us support other businesses in our area. We would like your agency to reconsider not allowing peak shaving controls of generators like mine within the proposed 100 hour limits. The request NRECA filed does not ask for more hours of operation; just to include peak shaving use within the 100 hour limit . Since we're a part of a Cooperative we see the savings and revenue fromthis type of arrangement, not them . Plus, we are helping to reduce energy demand during the peak times. This is a significant savings to our small business. Sincerely, 

### Joc9 .~ ~ ~ ~J r ~~ l~' Triple A Farms Colfax, Wisconsin0 

# d 0 O 

# . .

U14 1+ C rr 

# z UQ 'RESORTED

IRST CLASS

D ^' S' K GG UNITFO o G O Nz' ~ 9in -J o N z C) ~5 N ®

A N~ W A G °m°O~
Exhibit 31.1


                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Kevin Halter Jr., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc.

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  quarterly  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 quarterly
report.

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  report,  fairly present in all material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.

4. I am responsible for  establishing  and maintaining  disclosure  controls and
procedures  (as  defined  in  Exchange  Act Rules  13a-14  and  15d-14)  for the
registrant and have:

     a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to me by others  within those  entities,  particularly  during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

     b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's  disclosure controls and
procedures  as of a date  within  90  days  prior  to the  filing  date  of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c.   Presented  in  this  quarterly   report  my   conclusions   about  the
effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures based on my evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date.

5. I have disclosed,  based on my most recent  evaluation,  to the  registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's  board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

     a. All  significant  deficiencies  in the design or  operation  of internal
controls  that  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability  to record,
process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and have  identified  for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     b. Any fraud,  whether or not material,  that involves  management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6. I have  indicated in this  quarterly  report  whether there were  significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal  controls  subsequent  to the  date  of  our  most  recent  evaluation,
including any  corrective  actions with regard to significant  deficiencies  and
material weaknesses.


Date:  December 21, 2006            /s/ Kevin Halter, Jr.
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Kevin Halter, Jr., President,
                                    Treasurer and Director (Principal
                                    Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)