alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered March 5, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-00422-CR

AUSTIN MICHAEL BRUMLEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 401-81289-2011

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On January 23, 2013, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why 

appellant’s brief had not been filed. On February 28, 2013, we received appellant’s brief, 

together with an extension motion. Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeal, we 

VACATE the January 23, 2013 order requiring findings.

We GRANT the February 28, 2013 extension motion and ORDER appellant’s brief filed 

as of the date of this order.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as Adopted
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Michael D. Durham, as President and Chief Executive Officer of ADA-ES, Inc.
(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 Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 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/ Michael D. Durham
|Name:                 |  | Michael D. Durham                    
|Title:                |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date:                 |  | March 29, 2010
Roberts WINTER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Melissa Ann WINTER n/k/a Melissa Ann Pederson, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3362

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

October 10, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Exhibit 32


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


<PAGE>

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 Annual  Report of  Xpention  Genetics,  Inc.  (formerly
Bayview  Corporation  (the  "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended May
31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  the  undersigned,  in the capacities and on the dates indicated
below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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 results of operations of the Company.


Date:  April 19, 2006


/s/ David Kittrell
---------------------------------------
David Kittrell, CEO and CFO
Exhibit 31.1

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Chadwick S. Parson, certify that:

 

1.            I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of the Select Notes Trust LT 2003-1;

 

2.            Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.            Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided to the depositor by the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;

 

4.            I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor and the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement and based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the depositor and the trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: U.S. Bank Trust National Association.

 

 

By:      /s/ Chadwick S. Parson                       

Name:  Chadwick S. Parson

Title     Managing Director and President   

Structured Obligations Corporation

(senior officer in charge of securitization function of the Depositor)

Date:  March 30, 2010

 

 

----
OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

._. . . . . :

. .

‘ ~tklthtraepwthu been mmivd.

### .*&o. a. Sfb6$in such JudtuU3. Mstrloto

tbo Dititriot AttoPaey,~vlth the rwat az 

### *St&r 6s the Diotriet 

### Judgeo,1r lwoby autllo~iea.

to CrypaInt 

### on0 Moiotont Dlotriot Attwmyr who u&all reat&verr aal.aryThme zhouourrl.

Qollor~~ (~~,000.00) per'aomm pry.' ble w,tba 

### statenontbly. 

### -%eo. 3. T&atMid Aoofiant MotPiet Attommy shall baya all ol’the qual%SiootioIls tbot +t?. wt+ Nqttirett w ‘ kv Or Diotrriot Attw, **ohall toko**  **an 08th**  **OS oWiae**  **before one**  **ai the**  Dlotriot **Jia&eo Qr**  ***vi&i** wottiiat, 

### obll bo.iubJeot

to mmoml et 

### tWv3.U ai tba Diotrlut

Attorney, 

### aml uudeb the AbeoWon OS tba 

### DiotHot Attonae~, 

### 8b8Ubo aoe tholaxea to peProN mJ.o?fioiel Mb deYOlYf.iIg .upen OP suwm~sad to b6 portwd by the Dimtktot AttorneyAz4iUfie )26k-7, Verafan 

### Amwtated Cioil statutea, sootian 2 OS AQticls 32&h, uupN* and 

### provhleo aa 

### fol-

### Irtioli

~r0iiti0t 

### : 496

- '8eotion 1. That .th Diatriat Attevnor 

### of tltB 53x4 &Idloiol

motriot of Teooo io 8utbarirod te~lntaaAsolotontZUotrli&AtYE3 in'addition to that OMbBPiMd by 8eo

### Of Artiole 326n, 00 crrmied fONord la 

### vewto Qivil at&tut*o OS the 

### btrto

Of' Iemo, aadsr Aoto 

### ai 1931,tom-oeoasrbkgfolo aso, p4go 744,Qhapt.r 

### 291. "800. 2. ate Ao~otoht ‘motrirt 

### Attomay

VWIttVS’8

### Almototed

Oi*il 8tatiUt80, POOdO

### . . -. 497

# “
. 498

%hto la.0 

### of wtmotion boo found ircrquent and apt tlluotNtfene when ON of the ruppa0ea.y odliotlag ote*teo NO gone+l ia it0 terma and 

### t he Ow l eP l p s o%f~o .

rrk m a h l Ma e it le kzxtYe r e o l

### 1yhQld twt 

### the cQmei*10 oht;uto mom CleoPly-
**EXHIBIT12.2****SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**I, Juan Fernandez Galeazzi, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Grupo TMM, S.A.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The company’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the company and have:     a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b. [Reserved.] [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Releases Nos. 33-8618; 34-52492.];     c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and     5. The company’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect thecompany’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 havea significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date:June 30, 2006                                       /s/ Juan Fernandez Galeazzi   Juan Fernandez Galeazzi   Chief Financial Officer
Mackel D. WALKER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3929

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

October 11, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Certiorari is denied.
_____________ No. 96-1103WM

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Western v. * District of Missouri. * Charles F. White, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: May 24, 1996 Filed: June 4, 1996

_____________ Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Charles F. White appeals the district court's order denying his 1 8 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence. Because White filed hi s notice of appeal more than ten days after entry of the order, we lac k jurisdiction to review the merits of his appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) (affording criminal defendants ten days after entry of judgment or order to file notice of appeal; district court may grant thirty-day extensio n upon showing of excusable neglect); United States v. Petty , No. 96-1315, slip op. at 2 (8th Cir. May 6, 1996) (Rule 4(b) applies to appeals fro m denial of § 3582(c)(2 ) motions; timely notice of appeal is both mandatory and jurisdictional). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

### -2- A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
## 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

              - california(7)
              - kansas(1)

## By Year

Posters        December 31, 2014        Plankton response to low dissolved oxygen in the Tualatin River

Posters        April 1, 2023        Lepidoptera flier.JPG

Posters        October 27, 2022        November Public Lecture Flyer, 2022

Data Access        December 7, 2018        Areas of Land Subsidence in California

Interactive Map        July 16, 2021        The Mojave River:  Lifeblood of the Desert

Data Access        December 18, 2018        San Antonio Creek Valley Hydrologic Monitoring

Data Access        December 19, 2018        Drought & Groundwater in California

Data Access        November 7, 2018        Mojave Groundwater Data

Data Access        December 10, 2018        Lower Colorado River Hydrologic Monitoring

Data Access        January 31, 2019        Assessment of Groundwater Quality in the Borrego Valley
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Early Warnings and Alerts

Filters

              - (-)multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - california(12)
              - (-)colorado(1)
              - hawaii(2)
              - oregon(1)
              - virginia(2)
              - washington(5)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        March 21, 2017        Monitoring Land-Atmosphere Exchange of Moisture to Understand Drought
# C_2020293EN.01000301.xml

| 4.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 293/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 293/3

---

Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
  )

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 293/03)

Decision granting an authorisation

| Reference of the decision (2) | Date of decision | Substance name | Holder of the authorisation | Authorisation number | Authorised use | Date of expiry of review period | Reasons for the decision |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| C(2020) 5826 final | 28 August 2020 | Sodium dichromate
  EC No 234-190-3, CAS No 7789-12-0, 10588-01-9 | Società Chimica Bussi S.p.A.
  Piazzale Elettrochimica 1, 65022 Bussi sul Tirino, Italy. | REACH/20/16/0 | Additive for suppressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, pH buffering and cathode corrosion protection in the electrolytic manufacturing of sodium chlorite | 12 years from the date of adoption of this Decision | In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health from the uses of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies. |

Reference of the decision (2)

Date of decision

Substance name

Holder of the authorisation

Authorisation number

Authorised use

Date of expiry of review period

Reasons for the decision

C(2020) 5826 final

28 August 2020

Sodium dichromate

EC No 234-190-3, CAS No 7789-12-0, 10588-01-9

Società Chimica Bussi S.p.A.

Piazzale Elettrochimica 1, 65022 Bussi sul Tirino, Italy.

REACH/20/16/0

Additive for suppressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, pH buffering and cathode corrosion protection in the electrolytic manufacturing of sodium chlorite

12 years from the date of adoption of this Decision

In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health from the uses of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.

---

(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: CoreCast

Filters

              - multimedia_audio(300)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(299)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(33)
              - multimedia_image-141771(33)
              - multimedia_video(34)
              - multimedia_video-149195(2)
              - multimedia_video-149225(28)
              - (-)connect_social_media(1)

## By Location

## By Year

              - 2020(1)

social mediaUSGS CoreCast (Podcast)
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway,

 Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 23, 2009 

d1116 

Order 

 

November 23, 2009 

138792 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138792 

 COA: 289324 

Oakland CC: 2002-183849-FC 

NORMAN EDWARD FOX, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 9, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
NUMBER 13-20-00132-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

MICHAEL ALLEN TREVINO, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 11th District Court 

of Harris County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Tijerina

Order Per Curiam

This cause is before the Court on appellant’s amended motions to abate the 

appeal, to supplement the record, to extend time to file brief, and to extend the page limit 

of appellant’s brief. According to appellant, the trial exhibits were not included in the 

reporter’s record filed on July 8, 2020. 

The amended motion to abate is GRANTED, and the appeal is ABATED and the 
2

matter is REMANDED to the trial court. In accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 34.6(f)(4), the trial court is directed to conduct a hearing to determine: (1) if the 

appellant has timely requested a reporter's record; (2) if, without the appellant's fault, a 

significant exhibit or a significant portion of the court reporter's notes and records has 

been lost or destroyed or - if the proceedings were electronically recorded - a significant 

portion of the recording has been lost or destroyed or is inaudible; (3) if the lost, destroyed, 

or inaudible portion of the reporter's record, or the lost and destroyed exhibit, is necessary 

to the appeal's resolution; and (4) if the lost, destroyed, or inaudible portion of the 

reporter's record cannot be replaced by agreement of the parties, or the lost or destroyed 

exhibit cannot be replaced either by agreement of the parties or with a copy determined 

by the trial court to accurately duplicate with reasonable certainty the original exhibit. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(f).

The trial court is directed to forward the record of the proceedings, including any 

orders and findings, to this Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this order, or to 

notify this Court within such period indicating a date by which the trial court can comply.

Appellant’s amended motion for extension of time to file brief and second motion 

for extension of time to file brief are hereby GRANTED; appellant’s brief was timely filed 

on September 14, 2020. Additionally, appellant shall be GRANTED thirty days after the 

supplemental record to file a first amended brief.

Finally, appellant’s amended motion to extend the word and page limit is 

GRANTED and appellant’s brief now is now limited to 22,000 words and 75 pages.
3

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P.47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

21st day of October, 2020.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-14-00659-CV

T. T., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 250TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-FM-13-001803, HONORABLE AMY CLARK MEACHUM, JUDGE PRESIDING

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

Appellant T.T. appeals from the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights to

his son, T.T. See Tex. Fam. Code §§ 161.001(1)(E), .001(2), .007(a). Appellant’s court-appointed 1

counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief, concluding that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); see also Taylor v. Texas

Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646-47 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005,

pet. denied)(applyingAnders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights). The briefmeets

the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating

why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Taylor, 160 S.W.3d

at 646-47. Appellant was provided with a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to

examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

 Although the termination order also terminated the parental rights of the child’s mother, 1

she is not a party to this appeal.
The parties are familiar with the facts, procedural history, and applicable standards

of review. Accordingly, we will not recite them here. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. We have reviewed

the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find

nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80

(1988); Anders, 386 U.S. at 741-44; Taylor, 160 S.W.3d at 646-47. We affirm the trial court’s order

of termination and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw as attorney of record.

_____________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Puryear and Goodwin

Affirmed

Filed: March 18, 2015

2