alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Clear All

        29 March 2024    

                    NIWC Atlantic Conducts Largest-Ever, All-Domain, Naval Integration Event                 
                CHARLESTON, S.C. — In its push to advance joint all-domain warfighting concepts across the command, Naval Information Warfare Center (NIWC) Atlantic wrapped up its largest-ever annual System of Systems Naval Integration Experiment (SoSNIE) event on March 22.            

        15 December 2023    

                    Winners of NIWC Atlantic’s AI Prize Challenge Recognized at Eastern Defense Summit                 
                Naval Information Warfare Center (NIWC) Atlantic presented checks last week to Lauretta.io for $35,000 and Quartus Engineering Inc. for $15,000 for their 1st and 2nd place finishes in the Multilateral Autonomy Prize Challenge during the 2023 Eastern Defense Summit.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 17 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 1 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 17 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 2 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 17 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 3 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 17 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 4 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 17 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 5 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 17 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 6 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 17 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 7 of 7
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-13-00052-CV

HSBC BANK NEVADA, N.A.,

Appellant

v.

SPENCER PACK,

Appellee

From the 170th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-22544

MEMORANDUM OPINION

HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. appealed the trial court’s default judgment rendered 

against it. The parties have now filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal, stating they 

have reached an agreement to compromise and settle their differences in the proceeding 

below.

The Court’s Order of Referral to Mediation issued March 28, 2013 is set aside. 

The motion to dismiss is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice
HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. v. Pack Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed April 25, 2013

[CV06]
August 8, 2005

BY EMAIL AND AIR BORNE EXPRESS
Office of the Secretariat

Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Re: Rule Certification. NYMEX Submission 05-138: Notification of Approved
Amendment to Supplement No. 3, “Licensed Weighmasters for Copper” of
the Grade 1 Copper Futures Contract.

Dear CFTC Commissioners:

The New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. ("NYMEX" or the "Exchange") is notifying the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) of an approved
amendment to Supplement No. 3, “Licensed Weighmasters” of the Grade 1 Copper Futures
Contract to be implemented effective Friday, August 12, 2005. The approved amendment
changes the name of SGS Commercial Testing & Engineering Co, an Exchange Licensed
Weighmaster for Copper, to SGS North America Inc., Mineral Services Division. The address
and telephone number remain unchanged.

Pursuant to Section Sc(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”) and CFTC Rule 40.6, the
Exchange hereby certifies that the attached rule amendment complies with the Act, including
regulations under the Act. This approved amendment will go into effect on Friday, August 12,
2005.

Should you have any questions concerning the above, please contact Albert J. Getz at (212) 299-
2608.

Very truly yours,

Robert A. Levin
Senior Vice President - Research

ce: Christopher Bowen

Attachment: Approved Amendment to Supplement No. 3, “Licensed Weighmasters for Copper”
of the Grade 1 Copper Futures Contract.


Approved Amendment. Underlining indicates additions. Strikethrough indicates deletion.

Copper Supplement
No. 3

COMMODITY EXCHANGE, INC.

LICENSED WEIGHMASTERS FOR COPPER

ALMETCO, INC.
P.O. Box 85
Nocona, Texas 76255
(Orders: (940) 825-6975)

INSPECTION SERVICES INC.
3342 S. Hunter Farm Way
West Valley City, Utah 84128
( Orders: (801) 205-9066)

INSPECTORATE GRIFFITH U.S.A., INC.
5050 Timbercreek
Houston, Texas 77017
(Orders:(713) 944-2000)

LAUCKS TESTING LABORATORIES, INC.
940 South Harney Street
Seattle, Wash. 98101
(Orders: (206) 767-5060)

LEDOUX & COMPANY
359 Alfred Avenue
Teaneck, N.J. 07666
(Orders: (201) 837-7160)

R. MARKEY & SONS, INC.
5 Hanover Square, 12th Floor
New York, N.Y. 10004
(Orders: (212) 482-8600)


Approved Amendment. Underlining indicates additions. Strikethrough indicates deletion.

COMMODITY EXCHANGE, INC.
LICENSED WEIGHMASTERS FOR COPPER
PAGE 2

SGS North America Inc.
Mineral Services Division
Suite 210-B
1919 S. Highland Avenue
Lombard, Illinois 60148
( Orders: (630) 953-9300 )

ALEX STEWART (ASSAYERS) INC.
472 Westfield Avenue
Clark, New Jersey 07066
(Orders: (732) 827-0656)

U.S. COMMODITY SERVICES
1610 North 9" Street
Tacoma, Wash. 98403
(Orders: (253) 272-1402)

J.W. WISNER INC.
7670 East Broadway
Suite 105
Tucson, Arizona 85710
(Orders: (520) 296-3666)

ERSA GLOBAL USA, Inc.
Suite 707, 16607 Blanco Road
San Antonio, TX 78232
(Orders: (210) 826-3302)

SOUTHWEST COMMODITY WAREHOUSES, INC.
P.O. Box 78450
Tucson, Arizona 85705

4619 North Highway Drive

Tucson, Arizona 85705
(Orders: (520) 887-3606)
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 2 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 3 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 4 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 5 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 6 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 7 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 8 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 9 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 10 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 11 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 12 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 13 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 14 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 15 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 16 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 17 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 18 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 19 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 20 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 21 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 22 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 23 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 24 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 25 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27-4 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 26 of 26
Case 1:07-cv-01698-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 1 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01698-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 2 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01698-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 3 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01698-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 4 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01698-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 5 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01698-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 6 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01698-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 7 of 7
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 91 (Thursday, May 10, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 23907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11789]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Docket No. RP01-396-000]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

May 4, 2001.
    Take notice that on May 1, 2001 Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern) tendered for filing to become part of Northern's FERC Gas 
Tariff, the following tariff sheets to be effective June 1, 2001:

Fifth Revised Volume No. 1

56 Revised Sheet No. 50
57 Revised Sheet No. 51
24 Revised Sheet No. 52
54 Revised Sheet No. 53
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 56
16 Revised Sheet No. 59
Second Revised Sheet No. 59A
21 Revised Sheet No. 60
Second Revised Sheet No. 60A

Original Volume No. 2

164 Revised Sheet No. 1C
40 Revised Sheet No. 1C.a

    Northern states that this filing is to revise Northern's rates, 
effective June 1, 2001, to reflect an adjustment for the return and tax 
components associated with the System Levelized Account (SLA) balance 
as of March 31, 2001.
    Northern states that copies of the filing were served upon 
Northern's customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (Call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via 
the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the 
instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-11789 Filed 5-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Case 1:07-cv-05417-AKH Document 20 Filed 06/30/2008 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05417-AKH Document 20 Filed 06/30/2008 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05417-AKH Document 20 Filed 06/30/2008 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05417-AKH Document 20 Filed 06/30/2008 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05417-AKH Document 20 Filed 06/30/2008 Page 5 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 1 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 2 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 3 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 4 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 5 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 6 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 7 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 8 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 15-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 9 of 9
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 95-30491

Summary Calendar

_______________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ARNOLDO OZUNA GALAN,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

_________________________________________________________________

April 25, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judges:

Appellant Arnoldo Ozuna Galan challenges the 37-month

sentence he has received after pleading guilty to conspiracy to

escape from a federal prison. He also disagrees with the district

court’s evaluation of additions to his base offense level. We find

no error and affirm.

Galan first argues that the prosecution for conspiracy to

escape is barred by double jeopardy concerns because he was

punished in prison for the same conduct by being held in

segregation subsequent to the offenses, being transferred to a

higher security level facility, and losing good-time credit. Galan
-2-

argues that this court has not reexamined its decision, issued

before United States v. Halper, 490 U.S. 435, 448 -50 (1989), which

concluded that prison disciplinary proceedings do not bar future

criminal prosecutions. See, e.g., United States v. Bryant, 563

F.2d 1227, 1230 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 972 (1978).

While this court has not reviewed the issue in light of Halper and

other Supreme Court punishment-related cases, however, four other

federal circuit courts have rejected appellant’s contention.

United States v. Brown, 59 F.3d 102, 103-05 (9th Cir. 1995); United

States v. Hernandez-Fundora, 58 F.3d 802, 806-07 (2nd Cir.), cert.

Denied, 115 S.Ct. 2288 (1995); Garrity v. Fielder, 41 F.3d 1150,

1152-53 (7th Cir. 1994); cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1420 (1995);

United States v. Newby, 11 F.3d 1143, 1144-46 (3rd Cir. 1993),

cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 1841 (1994), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 111

(1994). We see no reason to disagree with their uniform

conclusion.

Galan also argues that the district court erred in

denying him a reduction for acceptance of responsibility and in

increasing his offense level by finding him a leader in the escape

attempt. We grant particular deference in reviewing these findings

of fact. The district court refused to award Galan a reduction for

acceptance of responsibility, in main part, because Galan

contradicted the investigation of the probation office and

attempted to minimize his involvement in the offense. The court,

which had authority notwithstanding the plea agreement to make

findings concerning Galan’s leadership role, credited the PSR’s
-3-

statements that Galan organized his relatives to assist in the

escape attempt, to maintain a safe house and to furnish

transportation to Mexico. The district court did not clearly err

in awarding either of these enhancements.

AFFIRMED.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-20752

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JESUS ORNELAS-LEZA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-96-14-1

- - - - - - - - - -

February 24, 1997

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jesus Ornelas-Leza appeals the sentence imposed subsequent

to his plea of guilty to reentry into the United States after

deportation. He argues that the court erred in denying him a

two-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility. It was not

clear error for the district court to deny the reduction for

acceptance of responsibility. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment. (n.3). 

AFFIRMED.
Case 1:07-cv-05398-AKH Document 27 Filed 01/10/2008 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-05398-AKH Document 27 Filed 01/10/2008 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-05398-AKH Document 27 Filed 01/10/2008 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-05398-AKH Document 27 Filed 01/10/2008 Page 4 of 4
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

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 June 23, 2009

s0615 

# Order

June 23, 2009

138569

DAVID B. FRIED, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 138569 COA: 288629 Ingham CC: 08-001078-AV PAULA C. REEVES, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 18, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
Case 1:07-cv-01523-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-01523-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-01523-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-01523-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-01523-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 5 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 1 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 2 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 3 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 4 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 5 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 6 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 7 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 8 of 9Case 1:07-cv-05377-AKH Document 14 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 9 of 9
AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed November 30, 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 16
- 00103
- CR MIKEY ALBERT LOPEZ , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee
On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F15
- 54865
- R 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Brown, and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Lang Mikey Albert Lopez waived a jury and pleaded guilty to aggravated ro bber y with a deadly weapon. See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 29.03(a)(2) (West 2011). After finding appellant guilty, the trial court assessed punishment at ten years’ imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appea l is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811

– 12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313,– 2

–

319

– 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases). We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824,
82 6

– 2 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/Douglas S. Lang/ DOUGLAS S. LANG JUST ICE Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 160103F.U05– 3

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
MIKEY ALBERT LOPEZ, Appellant
No. 05

- 16

- 00103

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F15

- 54865

- R. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang. Justices Brown and Whitehill participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered this 30th day of November, 2016.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

GLUE WILKINS,

Petitioner

v.

ATTORNEY BENJAMIN D. KOHLER, 

PROTHONOTARY, PA SUPERIOR COURT,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 8 MM 2024

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of May, 2024, the “King’s Bench Motion” and the “Motion 

for Judicial Notice” are DENIED.
Case 1:07-cv-05794-MGC Document 17-8 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05794-MGC Document 17-8 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05794-MGC Document 17-8 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350 Certifications

I, Alan D. Feldman, hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:



| | (i) | The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 3, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Midas, Inc.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Alan D. Feldman                            
|Alan D. Feldman                                
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date: November 12, 2009                        

I, William M. Guzik, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:



| | (i) | The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 3, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Midas, Inc.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ William M. Guzik                                
|William M. Guzik                                    
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|Date: November 12, 2009
Order filed June 16, 2016. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00312-CV

____________

THE ESTATE OF KATHI WALSH

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 365864

ORDER

This appeal is from an order signed March 22, 2016. Appellant, Ryan Overton,

filed a notice of appeal on February 25, 2016. Appellant filed an affidavit of 

indigence on April 8, 2016. 

No contest was filed. “Unless a contest is timely filed, no hearing will be 

conducted, the affidavit’s allegations will be deemed true, and the party will be 

allowed to proceed without advance payments of costs.” See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(f). 

Accordingly, the official court reporter for Probate Court No. 2 is directed to 

file the reporter’s record within 30 days of the date of this order.

PER CURIAM