alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed January 25, 2022 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-22-00009-CV

____________

DESIREE FELICIA SAPP, Appellant

V.

DR. ROBERT ANDING OF PREVIA MEDICAL GROUP; THE WOMAN'S 

HOSPITAL OF TEXAS, AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 

JOHN DOES 1-5, Appellees

On Appeal from the 189th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2021-76497

O R D E R

The clerk’s record was filed January 10, 2022. Our review has determined 

that a relevant item has been omitted from the clerk's record. See Tex. R. App. P.

34.5(c). The record does not contain the Order Denying Application for Temporary 

Restraining Order signed December 2, 2021.
The Harris County District Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s 

record on or before February 8, 2022, containing the above listed document.

If the omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to 

file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that the omitted 

item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Spain, and Hassan.
Exhibit 31.2

 

Sarbanes - Oxley Section 302 Certification

 
| I, James J. Judge, certify that: |
|----------------------------------|
|                             |
| 1.                     | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CEC Funding, LLC (the Registrant) and other reports containing distribution information for the period covered by the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. |
| 2.                     | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |
| 3.                     | Based on my knowledge, the financial information required to be provided to the trustee under the governing documents of the issuer is included in these reports; and |
| 4.                     | Based on my knowledge, Commonwealth Electric Company, the Servicer, has complied with its servicing obligations and minimum servicing standards. |
|  

                    |   |

 
|                                                                                                                                                              |                        |                                                                                                                                                   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: May  11, 2005                       |   By:   | /s/ JAMES J. JUDGE                       |
|                                                                                                                                                              |                        | James J. Judge                                                                                                                                         |
|                                                                                                                                                              |                        |                                                                                                                                                   |   | Senior Vice President, Treasurer |
|                                                                                                                                                              |                        |                                                                                                                                                   |   | and Chief Financial Officer |
Dean A. SHELLEY, DOC #T81166, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3800

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 25, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20301-20302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10114]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee; Open Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting 
of the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC). 
The meeting will take place on Thursday, May 18, 1995, from 8:30 a.m. 
to 12:30 p.m. in Room 2230 of the Department of Transportation's 
headquarters building at 400 Seventh Street, SW, in Washington, DC. 
This will be the twenty-first meeting of the COMSTAC. In addition to 
reports from the respective COMSTAC Working Groups, the meeting will 
provide a legislative update on Congressional activities involving 
commercial space transportation; a briefing on the status of the 
insurance industry; an activities report from the Office of Commercial 
Space Transportation; and other related topics. This meeting is open to 
the public; however, space may be limited. Additional information may 
be obtained by contacting Linda H. Strine at (202) 366-5770.

    [[Page 20302]] Dated: April 19, 1995.
Frank C. Weaver,
Director, Office of Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 95-10114 Filed 4-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
---

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

The undersigned, Andrew Grieve, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Fsona Systems Corp. for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2007 (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 Fsona Systems
Corp..

Dated: May 21, 2007



/s/ Andrew Grieve Andrew Grieve President,
Secretary and Treasurer (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial
Officer and Principal 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 to Fsona Systems
Corp. and will be retained by Fsona Systems Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Exhibit
13.1




Certification




Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of China Digital TV Holding Co.,
Ltd. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that the Company’s
annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the “Report”)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
      April 30, 2010/s/ Jianhua ZhuName:
            Jianhua
      ZhuTitle:
            Chairman
      and Chief ExecutiveOfficer





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-10133

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JASON ANTHONY CASTILLO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:13-CR-27-2

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jason Anthony Castillo pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea 

agreement to distribution and possession with intent to distribute 

methamphetamine. He was sentenced to 130 months of imprisonment and 

four years of supervised release. The sole issue on appeal is whether the 

district court erred in denying Castillo an adjustment for acceptance of 

responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. Castillo challenges the district court’s 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 18, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-10133 Document: 00512874858 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/18/2014
No. 14-10133

refusal to award him credit for acceptance of responsibility on the ground that 

he continued to use marijuana while on pretrial release, arguing that his use 

of drugs while on pretrial release was the result of an addiction and not 

indicative of a lack of acceptance of responsibility.

We review the denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility 

“under a standard of review even more deferential than a pure clearly 

erroneous standard,” and will affirm unless the denial is “without foundation.” 

United States v. Rudzavice, 586 F.3d 310, 315 (5th Cir. 2009). Although a 

defendant who pleads guilty prior to trial and truthfully admits relevant 

conduct may qualify for the reduction, “this evidence may be outweighed by 

conduct of the defendant that is inconsistent with acceptance of responsibility.” 

§ 3E1.1, comment. (n.3). We have consistently upheld the denial of reductions 

for acceptance of responsibility where, as is the case here, defendants have 

violated the conditions of their pretrial release. See United States v. Rickett, 

89 F.3d 224, 227 (5th Cir. 1996); United States v. Flucas, 99 F.3d 177, 180 (5th 

Cir. 1996); United States v. Hooten, 942 F.2d 878, 883 (5th Cir. 1991); United 

States v. Watkins, 911 F.2d 983, 985 (5th Cir. 1990). In Flucas, we specifically 

rejected the argument that the district court had ruled improperly because the 

defendant’s drug use “did not show a lack of contrition but, instead, was a 

result of his drug addiction.” 99 F.3d at 180.

Castillo has not denied that he used marijuana in violation of the express 

terms of the conditions of his pretrial release. Based on the undisputed 

evidence, the district court’s determination that Castillo was not entitled to a 

reduction for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to § 3E1.1 was not without 

foundation. Rudzavice, 586 F.3d at 315.

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-10133 Document: 00512874858 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/18/2014
EXHIBIT 17

REDACTED VERSION OF

DOCUMENT SOUGHT TO BE SEALED

Case 3:17-cv-00359-WHA Document 23-31 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 1
Dallas Jerome PIERCE v. STATE

CR-17-0156

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 28, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Exhibit 13.2

                                  QUINENCO S.A.
              SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Luis Fernando Antunez, the Chief Financial Officer of Quinenco S.A. (the
"Company"), hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 that:

1.    the Company's annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31,
      2003, to which this statement is filed as an exhibit (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: June 29, 2004

                               /s/ Luis Fernando Antunez
                               -------------------------
                               Luis Fernando Antunez
                               Chief Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Nos. DA 2 2 - 0 551 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JADE HUNTER KERR,

Defendant and Appellant.

_______________________________________________________________ **ORDER**

_______________________________________________________________ Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including November 4 , 2024 , within which to prepare, file, and serve his reply brief on appeal. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 27 2024

09/27/2024
Case Number: DA 22-0551
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 the Quarterly Report of A & J Venture Capital Group, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2010 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 the best of 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 operation of the Crown Equity.





/s/ Antal Markus

Antal Markus

Chief Financial Officer

Dated: September 27, 2010




This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Crown Equity  for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Written Description of Oral Agreement



 Exhibit 10.42 
 Written description of oral agreement between Beijing Pypo Technology Group Company 
 Limited and
Beijing Shidai Tiancheng Technology Development Co., Ltd. 
 From June 2006 to March 2007, Beijing Pypo Technology Group Company Limited,
or Pypo Beijing, made cash advances of approximately $1.1 million to Beijing Shidai Tiancheng Technology Development Co., Ltd., the joint venture partner of one of Pypo Beijing’s 50% owned subsidiaries. These advances are unsecured,
interest-free obligations and are payable on demand. Pypo Beijing made these advances to enable the purchase of mobile phones by and to meet the short-term working capital requirements of Shidai Tiancheng. Shidai Tiancheng repaid approximately $0.8
million in fiscal 2008. Shidai Tiancheng will repay the remainder of approximately $0.3 million prior to consummation of the business combination.
<PAGE>

                               [LETTERHEAD LOGO]


                                                                    Exhibit 23.1



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 2-94761, 33-7976, 33-30214, 33-41725, and 33-68588) of
Perceptronics, Inc. of our report dated June 3, 1999 with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Perceptronics, Inc. included in the
Annual Report (form 10-KSB) for the year ended March 31, 1999.




/s/ Beckman Kirkland & Whitney
------------------------------
Beckman Kirkland & Whitney
Los Angeles, California
August 4, 1999
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 Amendment No. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Bridgepoint Education, Inc. (the "Company"), for the period ended September 30, 2011 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned hereby 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, as amended (the "Exchange Act"); and

|   |                                                                                                                                                     
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: December 16, 2011


/s/ ANDREW S. CLARKAndrew S. Clark,President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)


Dated: December 16, 2011


/s/ DANIEL J. DEVINEDaniel J. Devine,Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)





This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent specifically incorporated by the Company into such filing.


A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CESAR ERNESTO SANCHEZRAMIREZ,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

THE CONSULATE GENERAL OF

MEXICO IN SAN FRANCISCO,

CALIFORNIA,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 13-16791

D.C. No. 4:12-cv-03485-PJH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Phyllis J. Hamilton, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 13, 2015** 

Before: LEAVY, CALLAHAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Cesar Ernesto Sanchez-Ramirez appeals pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing his action alleging various claims arising from his

FILED

MAY 18 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
employment with the Consulate General of Mexico in San Francisco. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s

determination of immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976. 

Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt v. Lasheen, 603 F.3d 1166, 1170 (9th Cir.

2010). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed this case for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction because Sanchez-Ramirez failed to show that his employment fell

within the commercial activity exception to immunity. See Terenkian v. Republic

of Iraq, 694 F.3d 1122, 1127, 1132 (9th Cir. 2012) (a plaintiff has the burden of

establishing that the foreign state is not entitled to immunity; the commercial

activity exception applies only where a foreign state “exercises those powers that

can also be exercised by private citizens, or when it acts in the manner of a private

player within the market, but not when it exercises those powers peculiar to

sovereigns.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

2 13-16791
EXHIBIT 32.01

                  CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER &
                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael Pacult, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
TriView Capital Management, Inc. as managing member of TriView Global Fund,
LLC, certify that (i) the Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 of
TriView Global Fund, LLC fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information
contained in the Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
TriView Global Fund, LLC.

TRIVIEW GLOBAL FUND, LLC
By:  TriView Capital Management, Inc., Managing Member

By:  /s/ Michael Pacult
Michael Pacult
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer

Date:	August 18, 2009

<page>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000710182
<NAME> TXU ELECTRIC COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       15,252
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                        619
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             667
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         1,830
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,368
<COMMON>                                         3,293
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                         (11)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                              3,462
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   6,744
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              845
<PREFERRED>                                        115
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                             4,780
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 142
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      535
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                   5,207
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                   18,368
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        4,847
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                               334
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       3,447
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       3,781
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                          1,066
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                (13)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                   1,070
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           370
<NET-INCOME>                                       702
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          7
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                      695
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                          325
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                           1,445
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Reggie HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-117

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 11, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.