alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

June 08, 2012

Ms. Cynthia Hollingsworth

Hollingsworth Walker LLP

Campbell Centre II

8150 N. Central Expressway, Suite 100

Dallas, TX 75206

Mr. James R. Evans

Hargrove & Evans, LLP

4425 Mopac South

Building 3, Suite 400

Austin, TX 78735

RE:Case Number:  10-0683; 10-0714

Court of Appeals Number:  10-08-00011-CV; 10-08-00012-CV

Trial Court Number:  0522992; 0522994

Style:AHF-ARBORS AT HUNTSVILLE I, LLC AND AHF-ARBORS AT HUNTSVILLE II, LLC

v.

WALKER COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas issued opinions in the above-referenced cause.  You may obtain a copy of the opinions at: http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/recent.asp.  If you would like the opinion by email, please contact Claudia Jenks at claudia.jenks@txcourts.gov or call (512)463-1312 ext. 41367.  The Motion to Consolidate is granted.  

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosure

**Case No. 10-0683Page 1**
VI 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 502 

For the relief of Maha Dakar. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 8, 2011 

Mr. BROWN of Ohio introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Maha Dakar. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi5 sion of law, for the purposes of the Immigration and Na6 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Maha Dakar shall 

7 be deemed to have been lawfully admitted to, and re8 mained in, the United States, and shall be eligible for ad9 justment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted 

10 for permanent residence under section 245 of the Immi11 gration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) upon filing 

12 an application for such adjustment of status. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 502 IS

1 (b) APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF FEES.—Sub2 section (a) shall apply only if Maha Dakar files an applica3 tion for adjustment of status, with appropriate fees, not 

4 later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this 

5 Act. 

6 (c) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS.— 

7 Upon the granting of permanent resident status to Maha 

8 Dakar, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper of9 ficer to reduce by 1, during the current or subsequent fis10 cal year, the total number of immigrant visas that are 

11 made available to natives of the country of the birth of 

12 Maha Dakar under section 202(a)(2) of the Immigration 

13 and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(2)). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### Todd Brewer WEEKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Nolan ESPINDA; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-15947.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 15, 2011.*

Filed June 30, 2011.

Todd Brewer Weeks, pro se.

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Todd Brewer Weeks, a Hawaii state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A) for failure to state a claim. *Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Weeks’s due process claim because Hawaii law does not create a liberty interest in the state’s furlough program. *See Olim v. Wakinekona,*461 U.S. 238, 249, 103 S.Ct. 1741, 75 L.Ed.2d 813 (1983); Haw.Rev. Stat. § 353-17.

We will not consider Weeks’s other claims because they are raised for the first time on appeal. *See Int’l Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftsman Local Union No. 20 v. Martin Jaska, Inc.,*752 F.2d 1401, 1404 (9th Cir.1985).

Weeks’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Kate Towart, Respondent, *v.*The Broadway and Seventh Avenue Railroad Company, Appellant.

(Argued March 14, 1890;

decided April 15, 1890.)

Appeal from judgment of the G-eneral Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made January Y, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.

*Samuel B. OlarTce*for appellant.

*Henry B. Stabler*for respondent.

Agree to affirm; no opinion.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 31                  Rule 13a-14(d) Certification

                                  CERTIFICATION

     I, Thomas G. Lehmann, a First Vice President of Washington Mutual
Mortgage Securities Corp., 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 WAMU MORTGAGE
PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2002-AR2;

     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 trustee by the servicer 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 servicer
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 servicer has fulfilled its obligations
under that agreement; and

     5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in
compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or
similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar,
agreement, that is included in these reports.

     In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated third parties acting as servicers
and sub-servicers:


None


Dated: March 29, 2005
                                     /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann
                                     ----------------------------------------
                                     Thomas G. Lehmann,
                                     First Vice President
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Stephen J. Markman Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices 

# Order

June 14, 2013

146458 & (63)

AUTO

- OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 146458 COA: 306860 Kent CC: 2010

- 006430

- CK TAX CONNECTION WORLDWIDE, LLC, JOHN R. BEASON, TAX CONNECTION WORLD, and JACKSON’S FIVE STAR CATERING, INC., Defendants

- Appellees.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for leave to file a brief amicus curiae is GRANTED. The app lication for leave to appeal the December 4, 2012 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

M ARKMAN , J. ( dissenting ).

Jackson’s Five Star Catering, Inc., brought an action against Tax Connection Worldwide, LLC, arguing that the latter violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 USC 227, when it faxed an unsolicited advertisement to the former. Auto

Owners Insurance Company brought t his action seeking a declaration that it has no duty to defend, but its arguments were rejected by the trial court, and the Court of Appeals

affirmed.

The policy at issue here covers an “advertising injury”

— an “injury arising out of

one or more of the f ollowing offenses”

— with Tax Connection asserting that (b) specifically is at issue:

a. Oral or written publication of material that slanders or libels a person or organization or disparages a person’s or organization’s goods, products or services;I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

June 14, 2013

s0611 2

Clerk b. Oral or written publication of material that violates a person’s right of privacy ;

c. Misappropriation of advertising ideas or style of d oing business;

or

d. Infringement of copyright, title or slogan. [Emphasis added.]

I agree with Auto

- Owners that it is unreasonable to conclude that the faxing of an unsolicited advertisement can be said to “violate[] a person’s right of privacy.” F irst, it is clear that subparts (a), (c), and (d) of the policy all refer to the substantive content of what was faxed and that (b) should also be construed as referring to the substantive content of what was faxed. Second, Tax Connection’s interpretation of “right of privacy” is inconsistent with the traditional meaning of that term in the tort context, in which an invasion of privacy generally refers to the publication of private or confidential information concerning an individual. See, e.g., Dalley v Dykema Gossett PLLC , 287 Mich App 296, 306 (2010). It is undisputed that the substantive co ntent of the fax at issue here did not implicate any such information. For these reasons, I would reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 687 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 687

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 15-year recovery period for qualified leasehold improvement property, 
    qualified restaurant property, and qualified retail improvement 
                               property.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 30, 2011

 Mr. Conrad (for himself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Vitter, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. 
Crapo, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Inhofe, and Ms. Snowe) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 15-year recovery period for qualified leasehold improvement property, 
    qualified restaurant property, and qualified retail improvement 
                               property.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED LEASEHOLD 
              IMPROVEMENT PROPERTY AS 15-YEAR PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF 
              DEPRECIATION DEDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Clause (iv) of section 168(e)(3)(E) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``placed in 
service before January 1, 2012''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2011.

SEC. 2. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED RESTAURANT 
              PROPERTY AS 15-YEAR PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF DEPRECIATION 
              DEDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Clause (v) of section 168(e)(3)(E) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``placed in service before 
January 1, 2012''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2011.

SEC. 3. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED RETAIL 
              IMPROVEMENT PROPERTY AS 15-YEAR PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF 
              DEPRECIATION DEDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Clause (ix) of section 168(e)(3)(E) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``, and before 
January 1, 2012''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2011.
                                 <all>
```
---

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002 Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report of Solanex Management
Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Report), I, Colin V. Hall, Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
do hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. § 1350), that to my 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 result of operations of the Company.

|By:    | /s/ Colin V. Hall             
|------ | ------------------------------
|Name:  | Colin V. Hall                 
|Title: | Acting Chief Executive Officer
|Date:  | March 28, 2008                

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section
  906 has been provided to Solanex Management Inc. and will be retained by Solanex
  Management Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
  staff upon request.]

---
| 1.   | The      Report fully complies in all material respects 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      Registrant as of and for the period covered by the  Report. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      March 31, 2009 |   | /s/ Jinyuan Li                             |
|---------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                      |   | Jinyuan      Li                            |
|                      |   | Chief      Executive Officer and President |
|                      |   | (Principal      Executive Officer)         |

| Date:      March 31, 2009 |   | /s/ Zheng Wan                                     |
|---------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                      |   | Zheng      Wan                                    |
|                      |   | Chief      Financial Officer                      |
|                      |   | (Principal      Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|                      |   |                                              |
|                      |   |                                              |
|                      |   |                                              |

----
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT SUKIT KUM VAC HIR

APITAG, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. B AR AC K OB A M A, U.S. Pre side nt, De fe nda

nt - Appe lle e . No. 14-17084 D.C . No. 4:14-c v-03182-KAW M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Kandis A. W e stm ore , M a gistra te Judge , Pre s iding ** Subm itte d Se pte m

be r 21, 2015 *** B e fore : REINHAR

DT, LEAVY, a

nd B E R ZON, C irc uit Judge s. Sukit Kum

va c hira pita g a ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dism issing his ac tion for la c k of subje c t m atte r jurisdic tion. W e have jurisdic tion



# FIL ED SEP 25 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.

** Kum va c hira pita g c onse nte d to proc e e d be fore a m a gistra te judge . Se e 28 U.S.C . § 636(c ).

*** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie wde novo. Ass’n of Am. Med. C olls. v . Unite d State s , 217 F.3d 770, 778 (9th C ir. 2000). W e a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d the a c t ion be c a use Kum va c hira pita g fa ile d to a lle g e c la im s unde r fe de ra l la w or dive rsity

of c itiz e nship. S

e e28 U.S.C . §§ 1331, 1332(a

); se e also Arbaugh v. Y& H C orp. , 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006) (fe de ra l c ourts “ h a

ve an inde pe nde nt obliga

tion to de te rm ine whe t

he r subje c tm atte r jurisdic tion e xists, e ve n in thea bse nc e of a

c ha lle nge from

any pa rty ” ); Ass’n of Am. Med. C

olls. , 217 F.3d a

t 778-79 (thepa

rty a sse rting jurisdic tion be ars the b urde n of e sta

b l ishing it). W e do not c onside r m atte rs not spe c ific a lly an d distinc tly

ra i se d a nd a rgue d in the ope ning brie f. Se e Padge tt v . W right , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th C ir. 2009) (pe r c uriam ). All pe nding m otions a

re de nie d. AFFIRM E D.

1 4 - 1 7 0 8 4 2
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2



                           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 Town Sports International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
Pyle, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
(Section Mark)1350, as adopted pursuant to (Section Mark)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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/ RICHARD PYLE
Town Sports International, Inc.
Chief Financial Officer
August 6, 2002
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURTOF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.O. BOX 12308. CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 FILE COPY

12/31/2014 HARTSFIELD, RICHARD EARL V\ COA Case No. 12-13-00343-CR Tr. Ct. No. 241-1150-13 PD-1679-14 

### On this day, this Court has granted theAppellant's Pro Se motion for an extension of time in which to file the Petition for Discretionary Review. The time to file the 

### petition has been extended to Tuesday, March 03, 2015. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE ENTERTAINED. NOTE: Petition For Discretionary 

### Review mustbefiled with The CourtofCriminal Appeals. Abel Acosta, Clerk

12TH COURT OF APPEALS CLERK CATHY LUSK 1517W. FRONT, ROOM 354 TYLER, TX 75701

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 642 

To permanently reauthorize the EB–5 Regional Center Program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 17, 2011 

Mr. LEAHY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To permanently reauthorize the EB–5 Regional Center 

Program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Creating American 

5 Jobs Through Foreign Capital Investment Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PERMANENT REAUTHORIZATION OF EB–5 RE7 GIONAL CENTER PROGRAM. 

8 Section 610 of the Departments of Commerce, Jus9 tice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Ap10 propriations Act, 1993 (8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amend11 ed— 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

2 

•S 642 IS

1 (1) by striking ‘‘pilot’’ each place such term ap2 pears; and 

3 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘until Sep4 tember 30, 2012’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### Erastus Corning, Respondent, *v.*Leurendus B. Ashley, Impleaded, etc., Appellant.

(Argued June 13, 1890;

decided June *24,*1890.)

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered upon an order made February 7, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.

*P. M. French*for appellant.

*Matthew Píale*for respondent.

Agree to affirm on opinion below.

All concur except Rugeb, Cli. J., not voting.

Judgment affirmed.
Amendment to Convertible Notes dated November 24, 2009



 Exhibit 10.3 
 AMENDMENT TO CONVERTIBLE NOTES 
 The
undersigned hereby acknowledge and agree that Article II, Section 2.1, for each of: (i) the convertible promissory note dated August 3, 2009 in the original principal amount of $7,171,441, (ii) the convertible promissory note
dated August 3, 2009 in the original principal amount of $6,639,058, and (iii) the convertible promissory note dated August 3, 2009 in the original principal amount of $3 million (the “Notes”), is hereby amended and restated
to read as follows: 
 “Section 2.1 Scheduled Payment. The Company shall pay the Accreted Principal Amount or, if less, the
outstanding principal amount of this Note to the holder of this Note on March 31, 2011, together with all accrued and unpaid interest on the principal amount being repaid, notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein including but not
limited to the provisions of Section 6.1(c) herein. At the election of the Purchaser in its sole discretion and upon written notice to the Company no later than March 15, 2011, such maturity date shall be extended until August 31,
2013 (either such date, the “Maturity Date”).” 
 The undersigned further acknowledge and agree that the
interest rate for each of the Notes will be reduced to 9.5% effective on September 1, 2010. 
  

									
	 QUANTUM FUEL SYSTEMS
 TECHNOLOGIES WORLDWIDE, INC.
	 		 	WB QT, LLC
					
	By:	 	 /s/ Kenneth R. Lombardo
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Andrew Redleaf

		 	Kenneth R. Lombardo	 		 		 	Andrew Redleaf
	Its: Vice President	 		 	Its:	 	 CEO

	Dated: November 24, 2009	 		 	Dated: November 24, 2009
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Martin Ross, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 712] —

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J.), rendered on or about March 15, 2011, and said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.R, Saxe, Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.