alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered March 6 , 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 19
- 01383
- CV DOROTHY WARREN, Appellant

V. 2359 HIGHLAND ROAD L LC D/B/A THE FINLEY THE HIGHLANDS, Appell ee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 19
- 05900
- C

ORDER In accordance with our March 2, 2020 order, court reporter Janet E. Wright has filed with the Court written verification appellant has not req uested the reporter’s record

. Our March 2nd order cautioned appellant that the appeal would be submitted without the reporter’s record if we received verification the record had not been requested. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(c). Accordingly, we ORDER the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record. See id.Appellant shall file her brief on the merits no later than April 6, 2020.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 9, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
132119 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. CRAIG S. BRAUN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices and

MARY FREE BED HOSPITAL, Intervening Plaintiff,

v SC: 132119 COA: 260118 WCAC: 03-000058 SECURE PAK a/k/a SAME DAY DELIVERY and AMERISURE IN SURANCE COMPANY, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the August 10, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

M ARKMAN

, J., dissents and states as follows:

I respectfully dissent and would reverse th e judgment of the Court of Appeals and
reinstate the decision of th e Workers’ Compensation Ap pellate Commission (WCAC). The WCAC reviews the magistrate’s decision under the “substantial evidence” standard,
while this Court reviews the WCAC’s determination under th e “any evidence” standard.
Mudel v Great Atlan tic & Pacific Tea Co , 462 Mich 691, 701 ( 2000). “‘If it appears on judicial appellate review that the WCAC carefully examined the record, was duly cognizant of the deference to be given to the decision of the magistrate, did not “misapprehend or grossly misapply” the subs tantial evidence standard, and gave an adequate reason grounded in th e record for reversing the magistrate, the judicial tendency should be to deny leav e to appeal . . . .’” Id. at 703 (citation omitted). Here, the WCAC rejected the magistrate’s decision on the basis of its conclusion that the magistrate: (1) failed to consider testimony by pl aintiff’s coworker that after a driver clocks out at 6:00

p.m. he’s “done”; and (2) misinterpreted te stimony by defendant’s dispatcher to mean that “rarely would an empl oyee receive a delivery run after 6:00 p.m.” when the_______________________________________ __ 2

dispatcher actually testified that “it was rare for a delivery run to come in just prior to 6 p.m.” The WCAC, in my judgme nt, fairly reviewed the magi strate’s sparse opinion and offered an “‘adequate reason grounded in the record for reversing the magistrate.’” Id. Further, the conclusion reached by the WCAC majority is suppo rted by competent
evidence in the record. Accordingly, under Mudel , the Court of Appeals should have denied leave to appeal in this case. Just as this Court in its decisions overwhelmingly defers to the WCAC, so mu st the Court of Appeals.

C ORRIGAN

, J., joins the statement of M ARKMAN

, J.

t0206 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 9, 2007

Clerk
* 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 February 23, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41616 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus EVERARDO AGUILAR-MARTINEZ, also known as Ricardo Acuna-Dominguez, also known as Benito Acuna-Dominguez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:04-CR-552-1

-------------------- Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Everardo Aguilar-Martinez appeals his guilty-plea conviction of being found in the United States illegally. He argues that, under United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005) , the district court plainly erred in sentencing him under a mandatory application of the Sentencing Guidelines. Here, the district court erred by imposing a sentence pursuant to a mandatory application of the Guidelines. See Booker , 125 S. Ct. at 768; see also United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 520-21 &No. 04-41616 -2- n.9 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). However, because Aguilar-Martinez has not shown that his sentence likely would have been different absent a mandatory application of the Guidelines, his argument fails. See Mares , 402 F.3d at 521. Aguilar-Martinez also argues that because this error isstructural in nature, reversal is required without any plainerror analysis or at least that prejudice should be presumed. However, he correctly recognizes that this argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Martinez-Lugo , 411 F.3d 597, 601 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 464 (2005). Aguilar-Martinez also argues that the penalty provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000) . Aguilar-Martinez’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Aguilar-Martinez contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi , we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Aguilar-Martinez properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_science(44)
              - products_publications(212)
              - products_software(1)
              - products_web_tools(7)
              - multimedia_image(9)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(6)
              - multimedia_image-141775(1)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - multimedia_video(26)
              - multimedia_video-149194(24)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)
              - multimedia_video-149197(1)
              - news_news-149245(4)
              - news_news-149248(3)
              - news_news-149250(1)
              - news_other_news(2)

## By Location

              - (-)california(1)

## By Year

Historical        March 8, 2018        Location of maximum land subsidence in U.S. Levels at 1925 and 1977.
Fernando CANTRES, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D13-5571

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 29, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
May 29, 2015 

Mr. Michael Marsiano 

Total Home Enhancements LLC 

216 Overridge Ct 

Purceville, VA 20132 

Dear Mr. Marsiano: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your April 29, 2015, exemption request on behalf into the public docket 

(No. FAA-2015-1343), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For 

us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division 

Enclosure
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_education(5)
              - science_faqs(5)
              - science_science(341)
              - products_data(70)
              - products_maps(16)
              - products_publications(2978)
              - (-)products_software(4)
              - products_web_tools(7)
              - multimedia_audio(53)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(47)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(6)
              - multimedia_before_after(3)
              - multimedia_image(130)
              - multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - multimedia_image-141770(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(106)
              - multimedia_image-141772(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(3)
              - multimedia_image-141775(10)
              - multimedia_image-141776(7)
              - multimedia_slideshow(3)
              - multimedia_video(146)
              - multimedia_video-149194(74)
              - multimedia_video-149195(32)
              - multimedia_video-149196(5)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(6)
              - multimedia_video-149225(6)
              - documents_file(2)
              - documents_file-149206(1)
              - (-)documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(21)
              - news_news-149246(4)
              - news_news-149248(27)
              - news_news-149249(4)
              - news_news-149250(2)
              - news_newsletters(3)
              - news_other_news(31)
              - connect_staff_profiles(6)
              - other_basic-42(8)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - california(1)
              - georgia(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - nebraska(1)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - texas(1)

## By Year

Software Release        August 31, 2023        Scale-dependent population drivers inform avian management in a declining saline lake ecosystem.

Software Release        June 7, 2023        Modeling widespread declines in walleye recruitment following zebra mussel invasion in Minnesota lakes

Supporting material        July 13, 2023        Citizen Science Call-to-Action Flyer

Software Release        February 7, 2024        Aquaculture and Irrigation Water Use Model 2.0 Software

Software Release        August 26, 2012        Central Valley Hydrologic Model (CVHM)
# C_2021517EN.01012301.xml

| 22.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 517/123 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 517/123

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013, as regards restrictions to the access to Union waters

(COM(2021) 356 final — 2021/0176 (COD))

(2021/C 517/22)

| Referral | European Parliament, 8.7.2021
  Council, 16.7.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Articles 43(2) and article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment |
| Adopted at plenary | 22.9.2021 |
| Plenary session No | 563 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 232/0/5 |

Referral

European Parliament, 8.7.2021

Council, 16.7.2021

Legal basis

Articles 43(2) and article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Adopted at plenary

22.9.2021

Plenary session No

563

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

232/0/5

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 563rd plenary session of 22 and 23 September 2021 (meeting of 22 September), by 232 votes with 5 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 22 September 2021.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---
1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1

January 5, 2015 In re: 03-14-00760-CR; SOT v Linda Woodman

Mr. Kyle, I am respectfully requesting a 30-day extension to file this record. It is ten volumes. I can have it fil ed by Monday, February 2, 2015.

Thank you, Shana Wise, CSR 6642
EXHIBIT 32


     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     This Certificate is being delivered pursuant to the requirements of Section
1350  of Chapter 63 (Mail Fraud) of Title 18 (Crimes and Criminal Procedures) of
the  United  States  Code and shall not be relied on by any person for any other
purpose.

     The  undersigned,  who  are the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer,  respectively, of North Georgia Community Financial Partners, Inc. (the
"Company"),  hereby  each  certify  as  follows:

     The  Quarterly  Report  on Form 10-QSB of the Company (the "Report"), which
accompanies  this  Certificate,  fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a)  or  15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, and all information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition  and  results  of  operations  of  the  Company.

This 13th day of August 2004.


/s/  David  J.  Lance
---------------------
David  J.  Lance,  Chief  Executive  Officer
(Principal  Executive  Officer)

/s/  Rhonda  C.  Massengill
---------------------------
Rhonda  C.  Massengill,  Chief  Financial  Officer
(Principal  Financial  and  Accounting  Officer)


A  signed  original  of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears  in  typed  form within the electronic version of this written statement
required  by  Section 906, has been provided toNorth Georgia Community Financial
Partners,  Inc.  and  will  be  retained  by  the  Company  and furnished to the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  or  its  staff  upon  request.


                                      -18-
<PAGE>
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Early Warnings and Alerts

Filters

              - science_science(12)
              - products_data(2)
              - products_publications(25)
              - multimedia_audio(4)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(3)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(1)
              - multimedia_video(28)
              - multimedia_video-149194(25)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - news_news-149250(4)
              - connect_social_media(1)
              - (-)other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - virginia(1)

## By Year

General        November 13, 2019        Earthquake Early Warning Seismic Station Adjustment Terms

Featured Films and Shorts        September 26, 2023        National Preparedness Month Spotlight on Earthquakes [Part 4]

Featured Films and Shorts        September 27, 2023        Prince William Sound Landslide Hazards Project Overview

Featured Films and Shorts        December 31, 2020        USGS End of Year Accomplishments 2020
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Canyonlands National Park

Filters

              - connect_staff_profiles(2)

## By Location

              - arizona(2)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - texas(1)
              - utah(2)
              - washington(1)
              - wisconsin(1)

## By Year

              - (-)2024(2)

staff profileDavid J Dean

staff profileDavid J Topping, Ph.D.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 7589

DAVID M. WASANYI, Pharm.D. , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. GEORGE TRENT, Superintendent PCC , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Wheeling

. John Preston Bailey , District Judge. ( 5:20

- cv - 00225

- JPB

- JPM )

Submitted : February 17, 2022 Decided: February 23, 2022

Before AGEE and RUSHING , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
David M. Wasanyi, Appellant Pro Se. Lindsay Sara See, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA , Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

U npublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: David M. Wasanyi appeals the district court’s orde r denying his motion to reopen his closed 28 U.S.C. § 2254 action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Acc ordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Wasanyi v. Trent , No. 5:20

-

cv - 00225

- JPB

- JPM (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 27, 2021). We deny Wasanyi’s motion to appoint
counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequatel y presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Endeavour International Corporation (the “Company”) on Form10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 (the “Report”), as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, John N. Seitz, Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

1.  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ John N.  Seitz          |   |
|-----------------------------|--------|
| John N. Seitz               |
| Co-Chief  Executive Officer |

 

 

November 3, 2005

 

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to EndeavourInternational Corporation and will be retained by Endeavour International Corporationand furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 

----
**EXHIBIT 32**
 
 
 **CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO** **18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 I Faris McMullin, President and Chief Executive Officer of R-Tec Holding, Inc., (the "Company") , do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:
 
 ·
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and ·
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
 
 Dated: November 15, 2004
 
 /s/ Faris McMullin
 _______________________________________
 Faris McMullin
 
 President and Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 and,
 
 
 I Michael T. Montgomery, Chief Operating Officer of R-Tec Holding, Inc., (the "Company") , do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:
 
 ·
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and ·
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
 
 Dated: November 15, 2004
 
 /s/ Michael T. Montgomery
 _______________________________________
 Michael T. Montgomery
 Chief Operating Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
 20
### UNITED STATES NAVY

- MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Before

J. R. MCFARLANE, M.C. HOLIFIELD, P.D. LOCHNER

Appellate Military Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

SAMUEL J. BILES

SERGEANT (E

- 5), U.S. MARINE CORPS

NMCCA 201 400265

GENERAL COURT

- MARTIAL

**Sentence Adjudged:** 7 March 2014.

**Military Judge:** Col J.K. Carberry, USMC

. **Convening Authority:** Commanding General, 3d Marine Division

(

- )(Rein), Okinawa, Japan

. **Staff Judge Advocate's Recommendation:** LtCol K.T. Carlisle

,

USM C

. **For Appellant:** CDR Ricardo A. Berry, JAGC, USN.

**For Appellee:** Mr. Brian K. Keller , Esq

.

**11 December 2014** 

**---------------------------------------------------**

**OPINION OF THE COURT**

**---------------------------------------------------**

After c areful consideration of the record, submitted

without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence

as approved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform

Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROI DL

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Mark H. McKinnies, as Chief Financial Officer of ADA-ES, Inc. (the Company), certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(1) the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (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 results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Mark H. McKinnies
|Name:                 |  | Mark H. McKinnies      
|Title:                |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:                 |  | March 27, 2009