alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered June 18, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 13
- 00178
- CR JEFFREY KING, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 9 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 10
- 13223 

### O RDER Appellant’s brief was originally due April 13, 2013. The Court has twice granted appellant thirty

- day extensions of time to file his brief. The Court now has before it appellant’s third extension request, seeking another thirty days to file appellant’s brief. We DEN Y appellant’s June 13, 2013 third motion to extend time to file his brief.
We ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make a ppropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8( b ). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2d 708(Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is OR DERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include written findings and recommendations, t o this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order. This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, whichever is earlier.

/s / CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
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  Annual  Report of Altair  Nanotechnologies  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-K for the fiscal  year ended  December  31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, William P. Long, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of 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 results of operations of the Company.


/s/ William P. Long
----------------------------
William P. Long
Chief Executive Officer
March 26, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This  Schedule Contains Summary Financial Information Extracted from (A) Audited
Financial  Statements  for  quarter ended September 30, 1999 and Is Qualified in
its  Entirety  by  Reference  to  Such  (B)  Quarterly  Report  on  Form 10-QSB.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      254409
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 1088
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            285497
<PP&E>                                     1002945
<DEPRECIATION>                              253008
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             1714978
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      2715762
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                  42427
<COMMON>                                    910261
<OTHER-SE>                                (1036777)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               1714987
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             88223
<CGS>                                       418737
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               867486
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            188591
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          204544
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (967854)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (967854)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              39624
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                              (1007478)
<EPS-BASIC>                                 (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
HIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATIN EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND BALANCE SHEETS OF INDUSTRI-MATEMATIK
INTERNATIONAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES ANNEXED HERETO AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000
<CASH>                                      12,036,000
<SECURITIES>                                19,821,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               22,662,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,486,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            57,193,000
<PP&E>                                      18,693,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              12,098,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              88,932,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       24,543,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          318,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  61,141,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                88,932,000
<SALES>                                     73,485,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            75,025,000
<CGS>                                       50,444,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               50,873,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            48,973,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (65,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (22,799,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                              (22,799,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (22,799,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (22,799,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.72)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.72)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

Informational Addendum to Report on Form 10-Q

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

Not Filed Pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

The undersigned Chief Financial Officer of OYO Geospace Corporation does hereby certify as follows:

Solely for the purpose of meeting the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and solely to the extent this certification may
be applicable to this Report on Form 10-Q, the undersigned hereby certify that this Report on Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in this
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of OYO Geospace Corporation.



/s/ Thomas T. McEntireName: Thomas T. McEntireTitle: Chief Financial OfficerMay 4, 2006
DOLORES RIVER BELOW RICOLatitude: 37.639Longitude: -108.06Elevation: 8422.23

DOLORES RIVER BELOW RICO

Courtesy NRCS - Go to El Diente Peak Site Page...



El Diente Peak

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Lizard Head Pass Site Page...



Lizard Head Pass

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Scotch Creek Site Page...



Scotch Creek
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. Gary M. LARSEN, Lance Corporal, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant.

No. 30,305.

U. S. Court of Military Appeals.

Sept. 26, 1975.

*Captain Paul H. DuVall,*USMCR, was on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel P. N. Kress,*USMC, and *Lieutenant J. W. Malley, Jr.,*JAGC, USNR, were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Appellant contends that the Navy Court of Military Review erred in holding that the Government satisfactorily rebutted the presumed denial of speedy disposition which arose as a result of appellant’s 137 days of post-trial confinement prior to the convening authority’s action. *Dunlap v. Conven*
      *301
      *ing Authority,*23 U.S.C.M.A. 135, 48 C.M.R. 751 (1974); *United States v. Marshall,*22 U.S.C.M.A. 431, 47 C.M.R. 409 (1973).

Although the record of trial exceeds 1,000 pages, the court reporter completed the transcript within 37 days after the trial terminated. Twelve days later, the trial judge authenticated the transcript. Almost three additional months elapsed, however, before the 191-page post-trial review was completed, yet the convening authority took his action the following day.

We are not satisfied that the issues presented during the course of the trial were sufficient to warrant the nearly 3 months consumed by the staff judge advocate in preparing his unnecessarily lengthy review. As noted by the Court of Military Review in its opinion, the bulk of the delay was occasioned by personnel shortages in “this relatively small isolated command.” Repeatedly we have held that such considerations are insufficient to overcome the presumption which was triggered by appellant’s confinement for over 90 days. *United States v. Marshall, supra; United States v. Stevenson,*22 U.S.C.M.A. 454, 47 C.M.R. 495 (1973).

The decision of the US Navy Court of Military Review is reversed. The charge and its specifications are ordered dismissed.
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.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

      ( print page 50536)    

# TIME AND DATE:

Tuesday, September 14, 2021 at 10:00 a.m.

# PLACE:

1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC (this meeting will be a virtual meeting).

# STATUS:

This meeting will be closed to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109.

Matters relating to internal personnel decisions, or internal rules and practices.

Investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes and production would disclose investigative techniques.

Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

* * * * *

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Judith Ingram, Press Officer; Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Vicktoria J. Allen,

Acting Deputy Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2021-19597 Filed 9-7-21; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
KENNETH WRIGHT,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-2337

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 10, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Linda F. McCallum, Judge.

Kenneth Wright, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the denial of his motion for postconviction relief 

filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the denial 

of grounds one through three of the appellant’s motion. However, we reverse and 

remand the denial of ground four for the trial court to give the appellant an 

opportunity to plead a facially sufficient claim.
2

According to the appellant’s allegations, he was convicted of robbery in 

1974, for a crime that he committed as a juvenile, and was sentenced to life in

prison. In ground four of his motion, the appellant alleged that his life sentence for 

robbery violates the Supreme Court’s holding in Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 

2455 (2012), which forbids mandatory life without parole sentences for juvenile

offenders who commit homicide. However, Miller does not apply because the 

appellant was not sentenced to a mandatory term of life in prison for a homicide 

offense. The appellant is really challenging his sentence under Graham v. Florida, 

560 U.S. 48 (2010), which held that the constitutional prohibition on cruel and 

unusual punishments prevents a juvenile offender from being sentenced to life in 

prison for a nonhomicide offense without having a meaningful opportunity to 

obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation. Here, the 

appellant has failed to allege that he has never been released on parole and that he 

has no meaningful opportunity for release within his lifetime based upon 

demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation. See Currie v. State, 42 Fla. L. Weekly 

D1238a (Fla. 1st DCA May 31, 2017) (holding that a defendant sentenced to life in 

prison for a sexual battery committed when he was a juvenile was not entitled to 

relief pursuant to Graham where he was released on parole when he was 25 years 

old and was then reincarcerated, and where the Commission on Offender Review 

has assigned him a presumptive parole release date, as the defendant was afforded 
3

a meaningful opportunity to obtain release); Rooks v. State, 42 Fla. L. Weekly 

D1573a (Fla. 3d DCA July 12, 2017) (holding that a defendant who was released 

on parole and violated the parole is not entitled to resentencing under Florida’s

newly-enacted juvenile sentencing law). We reverse and remand for the lower 

court to give the appellant an opportunity to allege that he has never been released 

and has no meaningful opportunity to obtain release within his lifetime based on 

demonstrated maturity, if he can do so in good faith.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED in part with 

directions.

WOLF, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ, CONCUR.
#### In the Matter of Donald Chiolo et al., Appellants, v Juan U. Ortiz, as Personnel Director of the City of New York, Respondent.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Allen Myers, J.), entered on June 17, 1985, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Allen Myers, J., at Special Term, without costs and without disbursements. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Asch, Milonas and Rosenberger, JJ.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
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 Kentucky Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.


Date:        August 14, 2007        By  /s/ Louis Prichard
                                    Louis Prichard
                                    President & Chief Executive Officer

Date:        August 14, 2007        By  /s/ Gregory J. Dawson
                                    Gregory J. Dawson
                                    Chief Financial Officer



26
Lexlibrary/197885.1
HUNTER CREEK AT ASPENLatitude: 39.197Longitude: -106.819Elevation: 7840

Hunter Creek at Aspen

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Chapman Tunnel Site Page...



Chapman Tunnel

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Independence Pass Site Page...



Independence Pass

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Kiln Site Page...



Kiln

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Nast Lake Site Page...



Nast Lake
# L_2012208EN.01002201.xml

| 3.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 208/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 208/22

---

Corrigendum to Directive 2009/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 providing for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-country nationals

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 168 of 30 June 2009
  )

On page 24, footnote 3:

for:

‘Opinion of the European Parliament of 4 February 2009 ...’,

read:

‘Opinion of the European Parliament of 19 February 2009 ...’.

---
EXHIBIT 99.1





                             CERTIFICATE 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 Azurel Ltd. And
Subsidiaries. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Edward Adamcik, Vice President Of Operations of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss 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/ Edward Adamcik
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                    Edward Adamcik
                                                    Vice President Of Operations
                                                    August 19, 2002
Order filed February 27, 2014

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00442

- CV NO. 14

- 13

- 004 6 2

- CV

____________ PAUL STEVEN JACOBS , Appellant

V.
MELISSA ELLEN FIELDS JACOBS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 308th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 2011

- 14576A & 2011

- 14576B



### ORDER
Appellant’s brief was originally due October 17 , 2013. We granted three
extension s of time to file appellant’s brief until February 12, 2014 . When we granted th e third extension, we noted that no further extensions would be granted
abs ent exceptional circumstances. No brief was filed. On February 13, 2014 , counsel filed a further request for extension of time to file appellant’s brief. Todate, c ounsel has submitted no brief. We g rant the request and issue the following

order.
Accordingly, we order appellant to file a brief with the clerk of this court on
or before March 13 , 201 4

. If appellant does not timely file the brief as ordered, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Guy Peaco, Appellant.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.), rendered on April 24, 1984, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur — Rupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Sunterra Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacity and as of the date 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: (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.



|                        
|------------------------
|/s/ STEVEN E. WEST      
|Steven E. West          
|Chief Financial Officer 
|Dated: December 12, 2005
GCMRC, Cooperator, and Tribal River Trips and Field Activities, June through September 2020

Launch Take 

out

Project Number, Agency, and Project Description Location

16-Jun 2-Jul Project D, GCMRC, Cultural Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

19-Jun 26-Jun Project H, GCMRC, Lees Ferry Trout Monitoring Glen Canyon

21-Jun 6-Jul Project I, AZGFD, Mainstem Fish Monitoring Grand Canyon

5-Jul 26-Jul Project G, GCMRC, Juvenile Humpback Chub Monitoring:

JCM & JCM west Grand Canyon

10-Jul 20-Jul Project F, GCMRC, Aquatic Food Base Monitoring Grand Canyon

15-Jul 19-Jul Project H, AZGFD, Lees Ferry Trout Monitoring Glen Canyon

12-Aug 28-Aug Project A, GCMRC, Water Quality and Sediment Monitoring Grand Canyon

14-Aug 17-Aug Project C, GCMRC, Terrestrial Vegetation Monitoring Glen Canyon

14-Aug 18-Aug Project F, GCMRC, Lees Ferry Aquatic Food Base Monitoring Glen Canyon

26-Aug 11-Sep Project C, GCMRC, Terrestrial Vegetation Monitoring Grand Canyon

26-Aug 4-Sep Hopi Tribe, Tribal Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

2-Sep 18-Sep Project I, USFWS, Mainstem Fish Monitoring Grand Canyon

11-Sep 17-Sep Project H, GCMRC, Lees Ferry Trout Monitoring Glen Canyon

15-Sep 28-Sep Project I, GCMRC, Mainstem Fish Monitoring (Seining) Grand Canyon

15-Sep 25-Sep Project G, USFWS, Little Colorado River Humpback Chub 

Monitoring

Little Colorado 

River

21-Sep 25-Sep Project I, AZGFD, Lees Ferry Trout Monitoring Glen Canyon

30-Sep 16-Oct Project B, GCMRC, Sandbar and Campsite Monitoring Grand Canyon

TBD TBD Hualapai Tribe, Tribal Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon
ACCEPTED 01-15-00874-cv FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 11/10/2015 7:43:41 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK