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

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 15, 2015

No. 04-15-00533-CR

Jesse GARZA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR7759W

Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file the brief is GRANTED. Time is 

extended to January 13, 2016. No further extensions will be granted absent extenuating 

circumstances.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 15th day of December, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements of Industri-Matematik International Corp. on Form S-8 (SEC file
no. 333-19737), Form S-8 (SEC file no. 333-25407), Form S-8 (SEC file no.
333-81905), Form S-8 (SEC file no. 333-92953), and Form S-8 (SEC file no.
333-60876) of our report dated July 27, 2001, relating to the consolidated
financial statements of Industri-Matematik International Corp. as of April
30, 2001 and 2000, and for the years ended April 30, 2001, 2000 and 1999,
which is incorporated in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

PricewaterhouseCoopers AB

By: /s/ ROBERT BARNDEN
    Robert Barnden

Stockholm, Sweden
July 27, 2001
#### Mitchell Benesowitz, Appellant, v Metropolitan Life Insurance Company et al., Respondents.

Submitted January 2, 2007;

decided January 11, 2007

Certification of question by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, pursuant to section 500.27 of the Rules of Practice of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.27), accepted and the issues presented are to be considered after briefing and argument.

Concur: Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith and Pigott.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

List of subsidiaries for NMT Medical, Inc.:

NMT Heart, Inc.
NMT Investments Corp.
Nitinol Medical Technologies FSC, Inc.
Nitinol Medical Technologies International B.V.
NMT NeuroSciences (International), Inc.
NMT NeuroSciences (US), Inc.
NMT NeuroSciences (IP), Inc.
NMT Neurosciences Holdings (UK) Limited
NMT Neurosciences Holdings B.V.
NMT Neurosciences (Belgium) SA
NMT Neurosciences Instruments B.V.
NMT NeuroSciences Holdings (France) SA
NMT Neurosciences (Hong Kong) Limited
NMT NeuroSciences GmbH
NMT Innovasive Systems, Inc.
NMT Neurosciences (Spain) SA
NMT NeuroSciences Implants (France) SA
NMT NeuroSciences Instruments (France) SARL
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 8056** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. CLARO GUTIERREZ GONZALEZ, a/k/a Sotero Cabrera Estrada , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 5:11

- cr - 00206

- FL

- 2; 5:13

- cv - 00411

- FL )

Submitted : June 10, 2014 Decided: June 26, 2014

Before SHEDD , KEENAN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Claro Gutierrez Gonzalez, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May

Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not bindi ng precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Claro Gutierrez Gonzalez seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unl ess a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (B) (2012) . 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) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U. S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a d ebatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gonzalez 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 legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.2


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



           In connection with the Quarterly Report of Blount International, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Calvin E. Jenness, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such
officer's knowledge:

      (i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the report.

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


Date:  August 13, 2004


/s/ Calvin E. Jenness
---------------------
Calvin E. Jenness
Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
#### All data considered provisional and subject to revision.

#### All data considered provisional and subject to revision.
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 00-1253

A. G. EDWARDS, JR.,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

MBNA AMERICA, ET AL.,

Defendants, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Douglas P. Woodlock, U.S. District Judge]

Before

 Torruella, Chief Judge,

Selya and Lipez, Circuit Judges.

A. G. Edwards, Jr. on brief pro se.

Thomas W. Evans and Cohen & Fierman on brief for appellees.

December 1, 2000
Per Curiam. Appellant A.G. Edwards, Jr. appeals

from the district court judgment granting the motion to

dismiss of appellee MBNA America. We affirm this judgment

for essentially the reasons stated at the hearing held on

January 13, 2000. We add, moreover, that the appellant has

presented no evidence to support his claims that the district

court acted unfairly, and/or was biased against him, and/or

did not properly apply the law to the facts of record.

Affirmed. See Local Rule 27(c).
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 30, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 129624 & (13) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan CYD C. LUCAS, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 129624 COA: 261799 WCAC: 04-000018 MICHIGAN BELL (AMERITECH SERVICES, INC.), Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 23, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to dismiss is DENIED.

t0123 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 30, 2006

Clerk
# C_2021047EN.01000101.xml

| 10.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 47/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 47/1

---

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 4 February 2021

to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Deutsche Bundesbank

(ECB/2021/4)

(2021/C 47/01)

THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.

| (2) | The mandate of the Deutsche Bundesbank’s current external auditors, KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, ended after the audit for the financial year 2020. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2021. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The mandate of the Deutsche Bundesbank’s current external auditors, KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, ended after the audit for the financial year 2020. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2021.

| (3) | The Deutsche Bundesbank has selected Baker Tilly GmbH & Co. KG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft as its external auditors for the financial years 2021 to 2026, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial year 2027, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Deutsche Bundesbank has selected Baker Tilly GmbH & Co. KG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft as its external auditors for the financial years 2021 to 2026, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial year 2027,

HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that Baker Tilly GmbH & Co. KG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft should be appointed as the external auditors of the Deutsche Bundesbank for the financial years 2021 to 2026, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial year 2027.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 4 February 2021.

The President of the ECB

Christine LAGARDE

---
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF


CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


OF APPLIED NATURAL GAS FUELS, INC.


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Cem Hacioglu, Chief Executive Officer of Applied Natural Gas Fuels, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that, to my knowledge, the accompanying Annual Report of the Company on this
Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date: April  23, 2010
By:
/s/ Cem HaciogluCem HaciogluChief Executive Officer
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1981 

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide that an employee’s ‘regular rate’ for purposes of calculating overtime compensation 

will not be affected by certain additional payments. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 23, 2015 

Mr. CALVERT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide 

that an employee’s ‘regular rate’ for purposes of calculating overtime compensation will not be affected by certain additional payments. 

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 ‘‘Employee Bonus Pro5 tection Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REGULAR RATE FOR OVERTIME PURPOSES. 

7 Section 7(e) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 

8 is amended— 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1981 IH

1 (1) by inserting before the semicolon at the end 

2 of paragraph (3) the following: ‘‘; or (d) the pay3 ments are made to reward an employee or group of 

4 employees for meeting or exceeding the productivity, 

5 quality, efficiency, or sales goals as specified in a 

6 gainsharing plan, incentive bonus plan, commission 

7 plan, or performance contingent bonus plan’’; and 

8 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘A plan described in clause (d) of paragraph (3) shall 

10 be in writing and made available to employees, provided 

11 that the amount of the payments to be made under the 

12 plan be based upon a formula that is stated in the plan, 

13 and be established and maintained in good faith for the 

14 purpose of distributing to employees additional remunera15 tion over and above the wages and salaries that are not 

16 dependent upon the existence of such plan or payments 

17 made pursuant to such plan.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
NO. 93-207 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1993

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and

v. PATRICK JAMES CAMPBELL,

Defendant and

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District,

In and for the County of Flathead, The Honorable Michael H. Keedy, Judge presiding.

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For Appellant: Patrick James Campbell, Pro se, Deer Lodge, Montana For Respondent: Hon. Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney General, George Schunk, Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana: Thomas J. Esch, Flathead County Attorney, Kalispell, Montana

Filed: Submitted on Briefs: August 26, 1993 Decided: November 16, 1993Justice William E. Hunt, Sr., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Appellant Patrick James Campbell appeals from an order of the Eleventh Judicial District Court, Flathead County, denying his petition to vacate sentence. We affirm. Appellant raises one issue on appeal, which we rephrase as follows: Did the District Court err when it denied appellant's request for an independent psychiatric evaluation? On July 12, 1983, Campbell stole an automobile from a grocery store parking lot in Kalispell. During the police chase, he attempted to smash head-on into a police car. Subsequently, a jury convicted him of felony theft and felony aggravated assault. On February 15, 1984, the court sentenced him to prison terms of four and seven years for theft and aggravated assault, and five years for being a persistent felony offender, all to run consecutively. In addition, the court designated him as a dangerous offender for purposes of parole eligibility. Campbell appealed his conviction and sentence to this Court in State v. Campbell (1985), 219 Mont. 194, 711 P.2d 1357. In that appeal, we held that § 46-14-202, MCA, does not provide for a second psychiatric evaluation. Campbell, 711 P.2d at 1362. Campbell now raises the same issue nine years after his initial conviction in District Court. We will consider this action as an appeal from a denial for post-conviction relief. Because we have previously ruled on this issue in Campbell's initial appeal, we 2hold that resjudicata precludes Campbell's appeal for post-conviction

relief. Hawkins v. State (1990), 242 Mont. 348, 351, 790 P.2d 990, 992. We affirm the decision of the District Court. Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court 1988 Internal Operating Rules, this decision shall not be cited as precedent and shall be published by its filing as a public document with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and by a report of its result to Montana Law Week, State Reporter and West Publishing Company.

We concur:

3
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7608

DOUGLAS LEE HUSKETH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

THEODIS BECK; MICHAEL S. HAMDEN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief

District Judge. (CA-02-583-5-BO)

Submitted: January 16, 2003 Decided: January 24, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Douglas Lee Husketh, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Douglas Lee Husketh appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Husketh v. Beck, No. CA02-583-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Sept. 17, 2002). We deny Husketh’s “motion

requesting this court to direct the Department of Corrections to

tax Plaintiff’s trust fund for cost of suit.” 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.

AFFIRMED
# L_2010252EN.01021001.xml

| 25.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 252/210 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 252/210

---

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

of 5 May 2010

on the closure of the accounts of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2008

(2010/547/EU)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2008,

having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2008, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 16 February 2010 (5827/2010 — C7-0061/2010),

having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 of 15 February 2007 establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (3), and in particular Article 21 thereof,

having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0090/2010),

| 1. | Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2008; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series). |
| --- | --- |

2.

The President

Jerzy BUZEK

The Secretary-General

Klaus WELLE

---

(1)  
  OJ C 304, 15.12.2009, p. 10.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 53, 22.2.2007, p. 1.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

4

---
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1977 

To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently prohibit 

the conduct of offshore drilling on the outer Continental Shelf in the 

Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and North Atlantic planning areas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 22, 2015 

Mr. PALLONE (for himself, Mr. CONNOLLY, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Mr. 

SIRES, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, Mr. HASTINGS, Mr. TONKO, Mr. LANGEVIN, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. KEATING, Ms. 

CASTOR of Florida, and Mr. QUIGLEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently prohibit the conduct of offshore drilling on the 

outer Continental Shelf in the Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and North Atlantic planning areas. 

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 ‘‘Clean Ocean and Safe 

5 Tourism Anti-Drilling Act’’ or the ‘‘COAST Anti-Drilling 

6 Act’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1977 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF OIL AND GAS LEASING IN CER2 TAIN AREAS OF THE OUTER CONTINENTAL 

3 SHELF. 

4 Section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 

5 (43 U.S.C. 1337) is amended by adding at the end the 

6 following: 

7 ‘‘(q) PROHIBITION OF OIL AND GAS LEASING IN

8 CERTAIN AREAS OF THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF.— 

9 Notwithstanding any other provision of this section or any 

10 other law, the Secretary of the Interior shall not issue a 

11 lease or any other authorization for the exploration, devel12 opment, or production of oil, natural gas, or any other 

13 mineral in— 

14 ‘‘(1) the Mid-Atlantic planning area; 

15 ‘‘(2) the South Atlantic planning area; or 

16 ‘‘(3) the North Atlantic planning area.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS