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

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo 

________________________

No. 07-20-00273-CV 

________________________

JEFFNA MCKINNEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX 

OF SID TALLEY’S ESTATE, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

LEE BIVINS FOUNDATION D/B/A BIVINS POINTE AND BETTY BIVINS 

CHILDERS FOUNDATION D/B/A BIVINS POINTE, APPELLEES 

 

 

On Appeal from the 251st District Court 

Potter County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 109,178-C-CV; Honorable Ana Estevez, Presiding 

 

July 27, 2021 

 

ORDER ON MOTION FOR REHEARING 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and PARKER, JJ. 

 

By her Motion for Rehearing, Appellant, Jeffna McKinney, Individually and as 

Executrix of the Estate of Sid Talley, simply reiterates the same argument she made on 

appeal—that section 74.351(l) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code requires 

a hearing and that “there was no hearing on Appellees’ motion to dismiss – whether in-
2

person, on the relevant pleadings, or otherwise.” Remaining convinced that our prior 

disposition was correct, we issue this supplemental opinion to clarify a misconception 

held by McKinney. She contends as follows:

[a]t the risk of irritating this Court, Appellant repeats there was no hearing 

on the pleadings. There could not have been a hearing on the pleadings 

because the trial court only had one set of pleadings on the dismissal 

issue—the pleadings of Appellees. The simple fact is that Appellant was 

no[t] “heard” on the motion to dismiss. 

McKinney should be assured that this court is not “irritated” by the advancement 

of serious issues and concerns—whether they are ultimately meritorious or not. We are 

concerned, however, whenever a litigant feels as if her procedural rights have been 

violated, and we wish to clarify the perceived misconception that a hearing was held by 

the trial court after hearing only one side of the issue. Based on our review of the record, 

we found a “hearing on the pleadings,” in the traditional sense of the word, occurred 

whenever the trial court considered the contents of the expert report filed, on the one 

hand, against the merits of the section 74.351(l) motion to dismiss, on the other. A section 

74.351(l) motion to dismiss should be considered “at issue” any time after the deadline 

for filing has passed.

Because the trial court here did not consider the motion to dismiss until after the 

deadline for the filing of an expert report, a “hearing” was had, and the motion to dismiss 

was properly considered. Accordingly, McKinney’s Motion for Rehearing is denied.

Patrick A. Pirtle

 Justice
Exhibit 32

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

In connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Pro-Fac Cooperative, Inc. for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Stephen R. Wright, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, 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 Pro-Fac Cooperative, Inc.

|       |  |                    |  |                                 
|------ |  | ------------------ |  | --------------------------------
|Dated: |  | September 21, 2007 |  | /s/ Stephen R. Wright           
|       |  |                    |  | General Manager, Chief Executive
|       |  |                    |  | Officer, Chief Financial Officer
|       |  |                    |  | and Secretary                   
|       |  |                    |  | (Principal Executive Officer and
|       |  |                    |  | Principal Financial Officer)    



---
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in 5THCIR.R. 47.5.4.

1

127 S. Ct. 625 (2006).

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 3, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

In The United States Court Of Appeals

For The Fifth Circuit

No. 05-40741

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

AQUILEO AYALA-FLORES,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

No. 5:04-CR-2469

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

On January 8, 2006, the Supreme Court vacated our judgment in this case and

remanded the case to this court for further consideration in light of Lopez v. Gonzales.

1 The

defendant hasserved histermof imprisonment and has been deported, but he remainssubject
2

___ F.3d ___ (5th Cir. 2007).

2

to a term of supervised release. Our disposition of this appeal is governed by this circuit’s

binding precedent in United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis.

2

Because the defendant remains subject to a term of supervised release, however, he

may still seek modification of the term of supervised release under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e),

which does not require his presence. We therefore DISMISS this appeal without prejudice

to the defendant’s right to seek a modification of his term of supervised release.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Clifford K. Bown, certify, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for VASCO Data Security International, Inc. for the quarter ended on
March 31, 2010, 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, as amended; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                            
|----------------------------
|                            
|/s/ Clifford K. Bown        
|Clifford K. Bown            
|Executive Vice President and
|Chief Financial Officer     
|May 7, 2010
**EXHIBIT 32.1**
SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION
I,J. E. Eisemann IV, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of TheRepublic Corporation (the “Small Business Issuer”), do hereby certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, with respect to this Annual Report on Form 10-KSBfor the period ended December 31, 2003 of the Small Business Issuer (the“Report”), that to the best of my knowledge:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results operations of the Small BusinessIssuer.
This certification is made solely for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 andnot for any other purpose.     /s/J. E. Eisemann, IV Chief Executive and Chief Financial March 30, 2004J. E. Eisemann, IV Officer Date
### NUMBER 13
- 10
- 00 333
- CR


## COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

MATTHEW RIOS , Appellant,

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

.

On appeal from the 24 th District Court of De Witt County, Texas

.



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Garza, and Benavides Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Matthew Rios , attempts to appeal his conviction for manslaughter . The
trial court has certified that this A is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal. @ See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(a)(2).2

On June 18, 2010 , this Court notified appellant = s counsel of the trial court = s certification and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether appellant has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel = s findings as to whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the existence of any amended certification. Upon suggestion of death of appellant’s attorney, Lawrence D. Elliott, the Court abated the appeal and remanded the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. The trial court conducted a hearing on August 19, 2010 and made a finding that the appellant made a knowing waiver o f his right to appeal and has no right of appeal. The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be
dismissed if the trial court = s certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d); see T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2(b).

D elivered and filed the 21st day of October , 20 10

.
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-14-0000539 23-JUL-2014 10:02 AM

SCWC-14-0000539 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ' I EDWARD K. NAKAULA, JR., Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant,

vs. STATE OF HAWAI ' I, Respondent/Respondent-Appellee.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-14-0000539; CR. NO. 12-1-0083; FC-CR. NO. 94-0011; S.P.P. 12-1-0005)
ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI ( By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson JJ.) The “Notice of Appeal”, filed on June 10, 2014, which we review as an application for a writ of certiorari, is hereby rejected. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ' i, July 23, 2014.

Edward K. Nakaula, Jr. petitioner pro se /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, T. Kendall Hunt,
certify, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for VASCO Data Security International, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, 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, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ T. Kendall Hunt                                           
|                                                              
|T. Kendall Hunt                                               
|Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of
Directors
|May 9, 2008
# CE2010046EN.01012901.xml

| 24.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 46/129 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 46/129

---

Dangerous substances and preparations (Dichloromethane) ***I

P6_TA(2009)0017

P6_TA(2009)0017

European Parliament legislative resolution of 14 January 2009 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC as regards restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (Dichloromethane) (COM(2008)0080 – C6-0068/2008 – 2008/0033(COD))

(2010/C 46 E/30)

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0080), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0080),

| — | having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0068/2008), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0068/2008),

| — | having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0341/2008), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0341/2008),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

---

P6_TC1-COD(2008)0033

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 14 January 2009 with a view to the adoption of Decision No .../2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC as regards restrictions on the marketing and use of dichloromethane

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision No 455/2009/EC.)

---
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 28, 2011

y1219 

# Order

December 28, 2011

143393

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143393 COA: 302708 Allegan CC: 08-015856-FH GERALD WILLIAM PAYNE, JR., 08-015874-FH Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to ap peal the May 27, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6020

JONATHAN JORDAN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

TRAVIS BRAGG, Warden, FCI Bennettsville,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. 

Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (9:16-cv-02130-BHH)

Submitted: May 10, 2017 Decided: May 22, 2017

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan Jordan, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jonathan Jordan, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 

28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for 

the reasons stated by the district court. See Jordan v. Bragg, No. 9:16-cv-02130-BHH 

(D.S.C. Dec. 7, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 3f

                                              FILED
                                                Aug 17 1987

                            CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION OF
                        THE CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT TO THE
                       RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                             OF CRONUS INDUSTRIES, INC.

     Cronus Industries, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and by
virture of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the
"Corporation") does hereby certify:

     FIRST:  That on May 8, 1987, C. A. Rundell, Jr., the Chairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, executed a Certificate of
Amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Cronus Industries,
Inc., reflecting an Amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of
the Corporation adopted by the Board of Directors on February 25, 1987, and
adopted by the stockholders of the Corporation on April 23, 1987.

     SECOND: That the Certificate of Amendment was improperly executed in that
it was not attested by the Secretary of the Corporation;

     THIRD:  That the Corporation desires to correct this inaccuracy as provided
below:

               "IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Cronus Industries, Inc. has caused this
          Certificate to be executed in accordance with Section 103 of the
          General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware by C. A. Rundell,
          Jr., its Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, this 8th
          day of May, 1987.


                                             CRONUS INDUSTRIES, INC.
     
     
                                             By:   /s/ 
                                                  ____________________________
                                                  C. A. Rundell, Jr.
                                                  Chairman of the Board;
                                                  Chief Executive officer

ATTEST:


          /s/            
_______________________________
John K. Sterling



<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Cronus Industries, Inc. has caused this Certificate of
Correction to be executed in accordance with Section 103(f) of the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware by C. A. Rundell, Jr., its Chairman of
the Board and Chief Executive Officer, this 31st day of July, 1987.

                                                   CRONUS INDUSTRIES, INC.



                                                      C. A. Rundall, Jr.
                                                      Chairman of the Board;
                                                      Chief Executive Officer

ATTEST:

     /s/       
________________________
John K. Sterling 


9 3 2 3 r








96582.1
Exhibit 23.1
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
   1)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-83852) of Oil States International, Inc.2)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-126485) of Oil States International, Inc.3)
    
    Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-57960, Form S-8 No. 333-97041, and Form
S-8 No. 333-152694) pertaining to the 2001 Equity Participation Plan of Oil
States International, Inc.4)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-63050), pertaining to the Deferred
Compensation Plan of Oil States International, Inc. and5)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-134312), pertaining to the increase in
authorized shares for the Companys Equity Participation Plan;
  /s/ Ernst & Young, LLP

ERNST & YOUNG, LLP
Order filed, July 26, 2016.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00296-CR

____________

ARMANDO CASTILLO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1448751

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due May 31, 2016. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 35.1. On June 14, 2016, this court ordered the court reporter to file the record 

within 30 days. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the 

reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Edna Thornton, the court reporter, to file the record in this appeal 

within 30 days of the date of this order. No further extension will be entertained 
absent exceptional circumstances. The trial and appellate courts are jointly 

responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 35.3(c). If Edna Thornton does not timely file the record as ordered, we will 

issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason 

for the failure to file the record.

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 13.1



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 on Form 20-F of ViryaNet Ltd. (the Registrant) for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 15, 2005 (the Report), the
undersigned, Paul V. Brooks, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, and Albert A. Gabrielli, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:



1. The Report
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.



|    |  |                                                          
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Paul V. Brooks                                       
|    |  | Paul V. Brooks Chief Executive Officer July 25, 2005     
|    | 
|    |  | /s/ Albert A. Gabrielli                                  
|    |  | Albert A. Gabrielli Chief Financial
Officer July 25, 2005
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 China Natural Gas, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Qinan
Ji, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 results of operations of the Company.





Date:
March 13, 2009





/s/ Qinan JiQinan
      Ji,Principal
      Executive Officer