alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS **AUSTIN**

fIOnoraEle

Buxton 6. Eeokaey Colmty .kttomey

, 'Wrry **catlat J**  Bxcmflolb, %xns '~
Deer Sir:HonorableBurton G. Haokaey, Page 2

Our answer to your first question Ie that unless the rural high school dlstrlot**formed** by groupin& the Fool Common Sohool Distrlotwith the xeedow Rural High ~ebool Dlstriot oontalns en awe @eater thea one hundred square miles, thus brlwing it under the punier of Artlole 2922(o) Vernon*s Anmtated Clril Statutes,providing iOr eleotlons in rural high sohool dlstrlotsof this area, no eleotlon oan properlybe held to group the dlstrlots**eforssaid** lnasmuohas Art&lo 2922(a),Vernon*8 &motatad Civil Statutes, (UIIDP~ other thingsprotldes~~ es rollowm *In eaoh organizedoounty In this State end la an7 aountywhich shall hereafterbe organized,tho oounty sahool trustees shall hare the authority to form one **or** more rural hi@ school dlstriots,by grouping contiguous OOJBSOLL school dlstriotshavia less thnn **rour** hundred soholaatlo

populationaud independentsoh+l dlstrlots huvlllg less than two hundred end **imy** sobolastlopowlatlon for **the** purpose of **estebllehlng** and Operatingrural high sohools

. . .*

This statute tests authority to group contiguous sob001 distrlotsin tbs p0pilatlonbraolssts set out tbwsln ~.II the oounty sohool tNsteo8 sXOspt whsre the arsa ot tbs rurelhlgh sob001 distrlotswo~d~~$reatrrthanons bmdrsd squeremiles, in wbldh oass Ark1016 89EZ(o),Vernon*8 mnotated Civil Statutes app.1.i~ and an eleotlonaust be held.
In the **event** the dlstrlots uy grouped either by order of the oounty sobool trustsesor **by** an elaotlonas se8 out in Artlole 2922(o) es aroresald, ii the distriotsorrated should oontaln an eree or more then one bundrsd squareallea, an eleotionoould bo held under euthorltyof ArtIols~2922(1) to levy a uriirora

tax over the rural high sohool distriot a8 a whole, at wblob eleotlon **the** qualiiied tex **peylng** Voters or such dlstriot shall vote as provided tor in said artIole.

The raot thst the Pool pi8trlot held an eleotlon attemptkg'to raise the rate to $1. in April and said sleetion railedwould have no **bearing** on an eleotiosheld over **the** dIetrIot**as a**  whole to levy e unlfora tax over said bistrlot as the rural.hlkhsohOo1 dietriot fOlW3d by **grOUplUg** the Pool coamn soho Distrlo$ with th6 previously **rorplsa Iceadow**  Rural High Sohool Distrlotuouhd aoaprls~ an entlrsly ww legal eMity. Of oourse, in the eleotlonheld the quelirled finx paying rokrs \or the newly rormed distrlot &s a whozl wo@d Vote emd the purpose or said eleotlon **aould be**  **ta .XCnr**  **a rtefforn**  **ret0** over **the** bistrlotas a whole,a$o raise tiho reWb LB the -1 Dlstriob.Honorable Burton G. Heoknsy, Page S

Trustlcg that the above setisieotorIly answsrs your questions,

we are Very truly yours

AiSSISTANT ERS:IUdd 

### APPROVED OPlNlON 

# 0 COMMn-rEE EWB c ”*l”*A*

APPROVEZ;AUG 11, 1939
J&u#i?k . ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
[No. 14976-5-III.

Division Three.

September 9, 1997.]

#### George Zimmer, *Respondent,*v. Gary L. Treat, et al., *Appellants.*Gary L. Treat, et al., *Appellants,*v. George Zimmer, et al., *Respondents.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Yakima County, No. 93-2-02526-1, F. James Gavin, J., entered May 24, 1995. *Affirmed in part*and *reversed in part*by unpublished opinion per Kurtz, J., concurred in by Sweeney, C.J.; Brown, J., dissenting.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7426

EMMETT W. CRESSELL,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

WARDEN YOUNG, Wallens Ridge State Prison,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge.

(CA-03-263-7)

Submitted: January 29, 2004 Decided: February 6, 2004

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Emmett W. Cressell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Emmett W. Cressell seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack

v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676,

683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Cressell has

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate

of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification pursuant to18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,As adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

Inconnection with the filing of the Transitional Report on Form 10-QSB for theperiod ended December 31, 2004 (the “Report”) by Creative ComputerApplications, Inc. (“Registrant”), each of the undersigned hereby certifiesthat to their knowledge:

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 Registrant as of and forthe periods presented in the Report.

 
| Date: February 24, 2005                                                             |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                |
| /S/ Steven M. Besbeck                                                               |   |
| Steven M. Besbeck,  President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to Creative Computer Applications, Inc. and will be furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

22

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000             SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0                       7
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                     557
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                   9,751
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                      55
<PP&E>                                               0                   1,050
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                  11,420
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                   5,626
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                  19,315
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                (15,965)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                  11,420
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,981                   7,600
<CGS>                                            2,672                   6,286
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,672                   6,286
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 114                     325
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (432)                   (809)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (432)                   (809)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    500                     500
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                        68                   (309)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.01                  (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01                  (0.06)


</TABLE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 18, 2013

NO. 03

- 12

- 00334

- CV

Sylva Engineering Corporation, Appellant

v.

Hasan Giray Kaya, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 419TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYE AR, PEMBERTON AND FI ELD AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND DISMISS ED IN PART

–

OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being

considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error in the district court’s

order EXCEPT for the portion of the district court’s order denying appellant’s motion to dismiss

appellee’s claim that appellant negligently designed portions of State Highway 45 to be almost

flat. IT IS THEREFORE considered , adjudged and ordered that the portion of the district

court’s order denying appellant’s motion to dismiss as to appellee’s claim that appellant

negligently designed portions of State Highway 45 to be almost flat is reversed, and judgment is

rendered dism issing that claim . However, we affirm the district court’s order denying appellee’s

motion to dismiss in all other respects. It is FURTHER ordered that each party shall pay the

costs of the appeal incurred by that party, both in this Court and the court below; and that this

decision be certified below for observance.
#### LA FOURRURE v. NEWMAN.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

May 3, 1912.)

Discovery (§ 37*)—Examination of Defendant.

Plaintiff has a right to examine the defendant to secure evidence to establish the allegations of his amended complaint and reply.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Discovery, Cent. Dig. § 50; Dec. Dig. § 37.*]

Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.

Action by La Fourrure against Abraham Newman. From an order vacating an order for the examination of the defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J„ and McLAUGHLIN, CLARKE, SCOTT, and DOWLING, JJ.

Clarence M. Lewis, of New York City, for appellant.

Leo Wolfson, of New York City, for respondent.

SCOTT, J.

The plaintiff seeks the examination of defendant for the purpose of establishing the allegations of the amended complaint and reply. The burden rests upon it of proving these allegations, and it is entitled to do so by any legal evidence, including the testimony of the defendant, if the evidence can be extracted from him. It is no answer to say that the plaintiff can prove its allegations otherwise. It has the right to prove them by defendant, if it elects to do so.

Order appealed from reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs. All concur.
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
 Cell Wall Biology and Utilization Research: Madison, WI
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Madison, Wisconsin U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center Cell Wall Biology and Utilization Research People





- Find a Person
- Find a Location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People
- Christina Arther
- Jonathan Bleier
- Mary Beth Hall
- Melanie Katawczik
- Pankaj Kulshrestha
- Wenli Li
- Jennifer McClure
- Jeffrey Messer
- Joseph Mielke
- Marilyn Millett
- Michael L. Sullivan
- Kevin Panke-Buisse
- Jan Pitas
- Wendy Radloff
- Laurie Reinhardt
- Carolyn Xue
- Geoffrey Zanton
- Wayne Zeller

Christina  Arther    Research Biologist /ARSUserFiles/57458/Arther test photo.jpeg
 Christina ArtherResearch Biologist 608-890-0069 1925 Linden Dr. W Madison, WI 53706 Cell Wall Biology and Utilization Research
 PublicationsNo publications listed for this employee.ProjectsIdentifying and Developing Strategies to Enhance Sustainability and Efficiency in Dairy Forage Production SystemsIn-House Appropriated (D)Accession Number:445642ARS News ArticlesNo news articles listed for this employee.


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
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

fIOnoraEle Buxton 6. Eeokaey 

Colmty .kttomey , 'Wrry catlat J 

Bxcmflolb, %xns '~ 

Deer Sir: 
Honorable Burton G. Haokaey, Page 2 

Our answer to your first question Ie that unless 

the rural high school dlstrlot formed by groupin& the Fool 

Common Sohool Distrlot with the xeedow Rural High ~ebool 

Dlstriot oontalns en awe @eater thea one hundred square 

miles, thus brlwing it under the punier of Artlole 2922(o) 

Vernon*s Anmtated Clril Statutes, providing iOr eleotlons 

in rural high sohool dlstrlots of this area, no eleotlon oan 

properly be held to group the dlstrlots eforssaid lnasmuoh as 

Art&lo 2922(a), Vernon*8 &motatad Civil Statutes, (UIIDP~ 

other things protldes~~ es rollowm 

*In eaoh organized oounty In this State end la an7 

aounty which shall hereafter be organized, tho oounty 

sahool trustees shall hare the authority to form one or 

more rural hi@ school dlstriots, by grouping contiguous 

OOJBSOLL school dlstriots havia less thnn rour hundred 

soholaatlo population aud independent soh+l dlstrlots 

huvlllg less than two hundred end imy sobolastlo powlatlon for the purpose of estebllehlng and Operating rural 

high sohools . . .* 

This statute tests authority to group contiguous 

sob001 distrlots in tbs p0pilatlon braolssts set out tbwsln 

~.II the oounty sohool tNsteo8 sXOspt whsre the arsa ot tbs 

rurelhlgh sob001 distrlotswo~d~~$reatrrthanons bmdrsd 

squere miles, in wbldh oass Ark1016 89EZ(o), Vernon*8 mnotated 

Civil Statutes app.1.i~ and an eleotlon aust be held. 

In the event the dlstrlots uy grouped either by 

order of the oounty sobool trustses or by an elaotlon as se8 

out in Artlole 2922(o) es aroresald, ii the distriots orrated 

should oontaln an eree or more then one bundrsd square allea, 

an eleotion oould bo held under euthorlty of ArtIols~2922(1) 

to levy a uriirora tax over the rural high sohool distriot a8 

a whole, at wblob eleotlon the qualiiied tex peylng Voters or 

such dlstriot shall vote as provided tor in said artIole. 

The raot thst the Pool pi8trlot held an eleotlon 

attemptkg'to raise the rate to $1. in April and said sleetion 

railed would have no bearing on an eleotios held over the 

dIetrIot as a whole to levy e unlfora tax over said bistrlot 

as the rural.hlkh sohOo1 dietriot fOlW3d by grOUplUg the Pool 

coamn soho Distrlo$ with th6 previously rorplsa Iceadow Rural 

High Sohool Distrlot uouhd aoaprls~ an entlrsly ww legal eMity. 

Of oourse, in the eleotlon held the quelirled finx paying rokrs 

\or the newly rormed distrlot &s a whozl wo@d Vote emd the purpose or said eleotlon aould be ta .XCnr a rtefforn ret0 over the 

bistrlot as a whole,a$o raise tiho reWb LB the -1 Dlstriob. 
Honorable Burton G. Heoknsy, Page S 

Trustlcg that the above setisieotorIly answsrs your 

questions, we are 

Very truly yours 

AiSSISTANT 

ERS:IUdd 

APPROVED OPlNlON 0 COMMn-rEE 

EWB c”*l”*A* 

APPROVEZ;AUG 11, 1939 

J&u#i?k . 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
**
**Exhibit 31.6**

**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF**

**THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, MarkHair, Chief Financial Officer of Restoration Robotics, Inc., certify that: 

 
1.
I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form10-K/A of Restoration Robotics, Inc.; and 

 
2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. 

 
Date: July 9, 2019  By: /s/ Mark Hair   Mark Hair   
Chief Financial Officer

(Principal FinancialOfficer)
**
Exhibit 32.1


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

     In connection with the Annual Report of New England Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as added by 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; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.


                                           /s/ David J. O'Connor
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           David J. O'Connor
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer



Date: June 29, 2004
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4600-DR;Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Georgia (FEMA-4600-DR), dated May 5, 2021, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This amendment was issued May 27, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Georgia is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of May 5, 2021.

Gordon County for Public Assistance.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2021-14097 Filed 6-30-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P