alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-22-00029-CR

ARTIS RAY DURDEN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 276th District Court

Marion County, Texas

Trial Court No. F 14886

Before Morriss, C.J., Stevens and van Cleef, JJ.
2

O R D E R

Appellant Artis Ray Durden appeals from his conviction of assault on a public servant. 

On May 5, 2022, Durden’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders1brief in this 

matter, and on May 13, 2022, Durden filed a pro se motion for access to the appellate record for 

purposes of preparing a response to his counsel’s Anders brief. Durden’s motion for access to 

the appellate record is granted. Under Kelly v. State,

2 we are now required to enter an order 

specifying the procedure to be followed to ensure Durden’s access to the record.

On May 23, 2022, this Court forwarded a paper copy of the appellate record, along with 

this order, to Durden. Allowing fifteen days from the date of this order for the record to be 

delivered to Durden and giving Durden thirty days to prepare his pro se response, we hereby set 

July 7, 2022, as the deadline for Durden to file his pro se response to his counsel’s Anders brief.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: May 23, 2022

1See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

2Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 321–22 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

MATTIE BOND, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:13-CV-227

)

PATRICK TARANTINO and )

RALPH MOYLE INC., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

This case was filed in this Court based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1332(a). (Docket # 1.) The Complaint alleges that “Defendant Ralph Moyle Inc., a Corporation,

is a commercial trucking and hauling company incorporated under the laws of Michigan” with a

registered agent in Michigan. (Compl. ¶ 2.) 

The Complaint, however, is inadequate as to Defendant Ralph Moyle Inc. because

corporations “are deemed to be citizens of the state in which they are incorporated and of the

state in which they have their principal place of business.” N. Trust Co. v. Bunge Corp., 899

F.2d 591, 594 (7th Cir. 1990) (emphasis added); see 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). The term “principal

place of business” refers to the corporation’s “nerve center”—the place where a corporation’s

officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities. Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 130 S.

Ct. 1181, 1192 (2010). 

Thus, the Court must be apprised of both facts—the state of incorporation and the state in

which the principal place of business is located—with respect to Defendant Ralph Moyle Inc. 

Here, although the Complaint alleges that Ralph Moyle Inc. is incorporated under the laws of

1

case 1:13-cv-00227-JVB-RBC document 4 filed 08/05/13 page 1 of 2
Michigan, it contains no allegations concerning the state in which Ralph Moyle Inc. maintains its

principal place of business.

Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED to supplement the record by filing an Amended

Complaint on or before August 19, 2013, properly alleging the citizenship of Defendant Ralph

Moyle Inc. by including the state in which its principal place of business is located.

SO ORDERED.

Enter for this 5th day of August, 2013.

/S/ Roger B. Cosbey 

Roger B. Cosbey,

United States Magistrate Judge

2

case 1:13-cv-00227-JVB-RBC document 4 filed 08/05/13 page 2 of 2
[No. 39009-1-I.

Division One.

September 22, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Terry Lee Gordon, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 95-1-05345-5, Marsha J. Pechman, J., entered July 26, 1996. *Reversed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         102,039
<SECURITIES>                                   566,791
<RECEIVABLES>                                  137,136
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,642
<INVENTORY>                                     40,903
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               954,652
<PP&E>                                         381,699
<DEPRECIATION>                                 117,881
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,289,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          162,681
<BONDS>                                         51,268
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,512
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,016,266
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,289,600
<SALES>                                        174,596
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               216,848
<CGS>                                           26,034
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  132,812
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,108
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                183,060
<INCOME-TAX>                                    61,694
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            121,366
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   121,366
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.77


</TABLE>
Victoria L. SPROUSE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 13-5568.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          13,900
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  258,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (52,400)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,588,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      1,558,700
<COMMON>                                         5,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     50,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     204,700
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,588,800
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               118,900
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   79,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,800
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              64,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 39,900
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             25,400
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,400
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        



</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO.: 1:13-CR-45-TLS 

)

DEVONTE TRAVIER )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 44], filed on April 15, 2014. The Defendant has waived objection to the

Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings and

Recommendation [ECF No. 44] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. Subject to

this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure

11(c), the plea of guilty to the offense charged in Count 2 of the Indictment is hereby accepted, and

the Defendant is adjudged guilty of such offense. 

The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate

order.

SO ORDERED on May 2, 2014.

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

THERESA L. SPRINGMANN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Bio-oils Research: Peoria, IL
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    NCAUR Homepage
                    BOR-NCAUR pilot plant facilities
                        Seed pressing and refining equipment
                                    Oil synthesis equipment
                                    Other equipmentSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Peoria, Illinois National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research Bio-oils Research Docs







Parr 5 gallon pressure reactorheadline bar The Parr 5-gal pressure reactor (#4555) is fitted with a 120 in/lb magnetic stirrer (3/4 HP variable speed motor), external valves and fittings of T316SS, 0-1000 PSI gauge, double valve assembly with dip tube, gas release valve, and thermowell.  The reactor as two different types of stirring options available:  Turbine type impellers and anchor stirrers with wiper blades.  The reactor can be cooled (10oC) or heated (350oC max) with the three zone aluminum block heaters using the PID temperature control.  Equipment be adapted to several different synthetic applications or methods.  Past runs have included:  hydrogenation of estolides and new crop oils.  /ARSUserFiles/50100530/images/Pilot plant photos/parr 5 gal 424.jpg


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2252 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2252

             To suspend temporarily the duty on Permethrin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 11, 2005

 Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To suspend temporarily the duty on Permethrin.

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

SECTION 1. PERMETHRIN.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.05.70      (2-Methyl-[1,1'-    Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         biphenyl]-3-                                                       31/2009
                         yl)methyl 3-(2-
                         chloro-3,3,3-
                         trifluoro-1-
                         propenyl)-2,2-
                         dimethylcycloprop
                         anecarboxylate
                         (Permethrin) (CAS
                         No. 52645-53-1)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2916.20.50)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Linda LEWIS, petitioner, v. CITY OF WAXAHACHIE, TEXAS, et al.

No. 12-9870.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 30, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 National Animal Disease Center: Ames, IA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Research Units
                        Food Safety and Enteric PathogensSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Ames, Iowa National Animal Disease Center Docs Virtual Conference





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News

Virtual Conference Archiveheadline bar  Keynote Presentations List of Sessions Posters by Session Posters by Author  Return to Virtual Conference Welcome Page


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
II 

Calendar No. 336 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2113 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 14, 2005 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2000 McDonough Street in Joliet, Illinois, 

as the ‘‘John F. Whiteside Joliet Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. JOHN F. WHITESIDE JOLIET POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 2000 McDonough Street in Jo7 liet, Illinois, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘John 

8 F. Whiteside Joliet Post Office Building’’. 
2 

•HR 2113 RS 

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘John F. Whiteside 

5 Joliet Post Office Building’’. 

Calendar No. 336 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2113 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office Building’’. Joliet, Illinois, as the ‘‘John F. Whiteside Joliet al Service located at 2000 McDonough Street in 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported without amendment
#### CROCKER et al., Respondents, v. ORPHEUS et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

February 6, 1898.)

Action by Leonard B. Crocker and others against Buffalo Orpheus and others.

No opinion. Motion for reargument denied. See 48 N. Y. Supp. 1103.
# C_2008206EN.01000601.xml

| 13.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5176 — CVC/Schuitema)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 206/03)

On 26 June 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5176. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5176. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

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

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Lyris, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Luis Rivera andHeidi L. Mackintosh, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, respectively, of Lyris, Inc. certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

 

(1)         TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
|  /s/ Luis Rivera                         |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Luis Rivera, Chief  Executive Officer         |   |   |
| September 16, 2008                       |   |   |
|                                          |   |   |
|  /s/ Heidi L.  Mackintosh                |   |   |
| Heidi L. Mackintosh,  Chief Financial Officer |   |   |
| September 16, 2008                       |   |   |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE DIVISION 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CASE NO.: 1:15-CR-62-TLS 

 ) 

FRANKIE WILLIAMS ) 

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 87], filed on February 28, 2017. The Defendant has waived objection 

to the Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings 

and Recommendation [ECF No. 87] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. 

Subject to this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 11(c), if applicable and necessary, the plea of guilty to the offenses charged in Counts 

Three (3) and Four (4) of the Indictment are hereby accepted, and the Defendant is adjudged 

guilty of such offenses. 

 The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate 

order.

SO ORDERED on March 14, 2017. 

s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

CHIEF JUDGE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
#### Jose Boanerge ZAVALA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr.; Janet Napalitano, Secretary of Department of Homeland Security, Respondents.

No. 10-2110.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 2, 2011.

Decided: June 29, 2011.

Joe W. Nesari, JW Law, P.C., Herndon, Virginia, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Lindsay W. Zimliki, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before KING and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jose Boanerge Zavala, a native and citizen of El Salvador, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s decision denying, as a matter of discretion, Zavala’s application for a waiver under former § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Because Za-vala is an aggravated felon, we lack juris*277diction to review his order of removal, *see*8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) (2006), except to the extent Zavala raises constitutional claims and questions of law. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (2006). We have reviewed the administrative record and Zavala’s claim that he was denied due process at his removal hearing, and we find that his claim lacks merit. *See Anim v. Mukasey,*535 F.3d 243, 256 (4th Cir.2008); Dekola*denu v. Gonzales,*459 F.3d 500, 508 (4th Cir.2006). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. *See In re: Zavala*(B.I.A. Sept. 3, 2010). We 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.

*PETITION DENIED.*