alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered July 15, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-01087-CR

CHRISTOPHER ANTON SIMON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F19-76381-H

ORDER

Appellant’s brief was originally due on March 30, 2022. We granted three 

motions for extensions of time, making the brief due on June 20, 2022. We 

cautioned appellant further extensions were not favored. To date, no brief has been 

filed, and appellant has not communicated further about the appeal.

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 

appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant 
desires to prosecute this appeal, whether appellant has abandoned the appeal, or 

whether appointed counsel has abandoned the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. 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 ORDERED 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, to this Court within 

TWENTY DAYS of the date of this order.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to the Honorable Tina 

Clinton, Presiding Judge, Criminal District Court No. 1; and to counsel for all 

parties.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above 

order. The appeal shall be reinstated twenty days from the date of this order or 

when the Court finds it appropriate to do so.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 04/05/11          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       62,954
COMMITMENTS
  19,666    1,019    4,646   25,268   40,669   49,580   46,334   13,374   16,620

CHANGES FROM 03/29/11 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      3,787)
   1,479     -545      965      559    1,675    3,003    2,095      783    1,691

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    31.2      1.6      7.4     40.1     64.6     78.8     73.6     21.2     26.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       74)
      31        4       16       30       26       65       45
```

----

Updated April 8, 2011
Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Annual Report of API Nanotronics Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending May 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen Pudles, Chief Executive Officer 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:

(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/     STEPHEN
PUDLES 
|Stephen Pudles         
|Chief Executive Officer

August 25, 2008
**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**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this Annual
      Report of Bankrate, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended
      December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
      the
      date hereof (this “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (2) the
      information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition of the Company as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and
      its
      results of operations for each of the years in the three-year period ended
      December 31, 2006.




March
              16, 2007
            
            /s/ Edward
              J.
              DiMariaEdward J. DiMaria
              Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
                Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
      Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
      upon request.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JUAN RICARDO PAMATZ-LUQUIN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-74667

Agency No. A071-945-716

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 29, 2010** 

Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Juan Ricardo Pamatz-Luquin, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for

review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for cancellation of removal. We

dismiss the petition for review.

FILED

JUL 01 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that

Pamatz-Luquin failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his

U.S. citizen children. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B); Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey,

552 F.3d 975, 979 (9th Cir. 2009).

Pamatz-Luquin contends that the brevity of the IJ’s explanation of the

hardship determination in her decision, as well as her failure to expressly articulate

that the documentary evidence was cumulatively considered, establishes that the

agency did not fully consider the hardship evidence or consider it in the aggregate.

We disagree. The record reflects that Pamatz-Luquin was given an opportunity to

present evidence at the IJ hearing and that the IJ was aware of this evidence when

she rendered her decision. Pamatz-Luquin also contends the Board did not fully

consider the hardship evidence because the Board’s decision references only two

of petitioner’s three children. We disagree, because the record reflects the Board

was familiar with the record and all evidence therein when it agreed with the IJ’s

hardship determination. Accordingly, Pamatz-Luquin’s contentions do not raise a

colorable due process claim. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930

(9th Cir. 2005).

Pamatz-Luquin’s contention, that the IJ applied an improper legal standard

to the hardship analysis, is unexhausted. See Ontiveros-Lopez v. INS, 213 F.3d
3

1121, 1124 (9th Cir. 2000). Morever, this contention does not raise a colorable

due process claim, when the record shows the IJ actually applied the proper

standard in determining the evidence in the record did not establish exceptional and

extremely unusual hardship. See Martinez-Rosas, 424 F.3d at 930.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
**Exhibit 32**

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofTitan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Marc Rubin, M.D., Presidentand Chief Executive Officer 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 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 result of operations of the Company for the periodcertified. 

Signed at the City of South San Francisco, in the State of California,this 12th day of May, 2008. 

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Titan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert E. Farrell, J.D., Executive Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer 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 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 result of operations of the Company for theperiod certified. 

Signed at the City of South San Francisco, in the State ofCalifornia, this 12th day of May, 2008.
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 06/21/11                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      215,571
COMMITMENTS
  20,476   43,074   47,153  122,714  102,484  190,343  192,711   25,228   22,860

CHANGES FROM 06/14/11 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -33,405)
  -2,465   -1,356   -5,532  -24,565  -25,791  -32,562  -32,679     -843     -726

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     9.5     20.0     21.9     56.9     47.5     88.3     89.4     11.7     10.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      125)
      38       37       57       27       27      105      101
```

----

Updated June 24, 2011
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

JONATHAN E. BRIERE, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-2662 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed September 27, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Philip J. Federico, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Kevin Briggs, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison C. Heim, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
Marlon CRAWFORD, petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 18-5334.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Amira Olivia GUNN, petitioner, v. NORTH DAKOTA.

No. 18-60.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Dakota denied.
**EXHIBIT 32.2****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906****OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**In connection with the Quarterly Report of Interland, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending November 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Gonzalo Troncoso, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: 1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange 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: January 9, 2006  /s/ Gonzalo Troncoso   Gonzalo Troncoso  Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
# Dziennik Urzędowy C 6A/6 st

| | ISSN 1977-1002 |
| --- | --- |
| Dziennik Urzędowy
  Unii Europejskiej | C 6A |
| | |
| Wydanie polskie | Informacje i zawiadomienia | Rocznik 656 stycznia 2022 |

ISSN 1977-1002

Dziennik Urzędowy

Unii Europejskiej

C 6A

Wydanie polskie

Informacje i zawiadomienia

Rocznik 656 stycznia 2022

---

| Spis treści | Strona |
| --- | --- |
| | Sprostowania |
| 2022/C 6 A/01 | Sprostowanie do ogłoszenia o konkursie otwartym – EPSO/AD/396/21 – prawnicy lingwiści (AD 7) języka irlandzkiego (GA) ( Dz.U. C 466 A z 18.11.2021 ) | 1 |

Spis treści

Strona

Sprostowania

2022/C 6 A/01

Sprostowanie do ogłoszenia o konkursie otwartym – EPSO/AD/396/21 – prawnicy lingwiści (AD 7) języka irlandzkiego (GA) ( Dz.U. C 466 A z 18.11.2021 )

( Dz.U. C 466 A z 18.11.2021 )

1

---

| PL | |
| --- | --- |

PL

---

Sprostowania

| 6.1.2022 | PL | Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej | CA 6/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2022

PL

Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej

CA 6/1

---

Sprostowanie do ogłoszenia o konkursie otwartym – EPSO/AD/396/21 – prawnicy lingwiści (AD 7) języka irlandzkiego (GA)

(
  Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej C 466 A z dnia 18 listopada 2021 r.
  )

(2022/C 6 A/01)

Strona 1:

| zamiast: | „
  Termin składania Zgłoszeń: 21 grudnia 2021 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Brukseli
  ”, |
| --- | --- |

zamiast:

„
  Termin składania Zgłoszeń: 21 grudnia 2021 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Brukseli
  ”,

| powinno być: | „
  Termin składania zgłoszeń: 25 stycznia 2022 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Luksemburgu
  ”. |
| --- | --- |

powinno być:

powinno być:

„
  Termin składania zgłoszeń: 25 stycznia 2022 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Luksemburgu
  ”.

Strona 5:

| zamiast: | „Zgłoszenia można składać przez internet na stronie EPSO https://epso.europa.eu/job-opportunities do:


  21 grudnia 2021 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Brukseli
  .”, |
| --- | --- |

zamiast:

zamiast:

„Zgłoszenia można składać przez internet na stronie EPSO https://epso.europa.eu/job-opportunities do:

21 grudnia 2021 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Brukseli
  .”,

| powinno być: | „Zgłoszenia można składać przez internet na stronie EPSO https://epso.europa.eu/job-opportunities do:


  25 stycznia 2022 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Luksemburgu
  ”. |
| --- | --- |

powinno być:

powinno być:

„Zgłoszenia można składać przez internet na stronie EPSO https://epso.europa.eu/job-opportunities do:

25 stycznia 2022 r. o godz. 12.00 (w południe) czasu obowiązującego w Luksemburgu
  ”.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

DAMAR LAMONT JORDAN, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 273 WAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 28th day of October, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

is DENIED.
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of AppealsCAAP-10-000001622-JUN-201108:32 AM
```

```

----

Updated March 25, 2011
# Amtsblatt C 162A/13.

| | ISSN 1725-2407 |
| --- | --- |
| Amtsblatt
  der Europäischen Union | C 162A |
| | |
| Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache | Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen | 49. Jahrgang13. Juli 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2407

Amtsblatt

der Europäischen Union

C 162A

Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache

Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen

49. Jahrgang13. Juli 2006

---

| Informationsnummer | Inhalt | Seite |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | |
| 2006/C 162A/1 | | 1 |

Informationsnummer

Inhalt

Seite

2006/C 162A/1

1

---

| | III   Bekanntmachungen |
| --- | --- |
| | Europäisches Amt für Personalauswahl (EPSO) |
| 2006/C 162A/2 | Bekanntmachung des allgemeinen Auswahlverfahrens EPSO/AD/51/06 für die Bildung einer Einstellungsreserve von deutschsprachigen Rechts- und Sprachsachverständigen (AD 7)Dieses Auswahlverfahren erfordert Hochschulniveau und keinerlei Berufserfahrung | 3 |

III   Bekanntmachungen

Europäisches Amt für Personalauswahl (EPSO)

2006/C 162A/2

Bekanntmachung des allgemeinen Auswahlverfahrens EPSO/AD/51/06 für die Bildung einer Einstellungsreserve von deutschsprachigen Rechts- und Sprachsachverständigen (AD 7)Dieses Auswahlverfahren erfordert Hochschulniveau und keinerlei Berufserfahrung

EPSO/AD/51/06

(AD 7)

3

---

| DE | |
| --- | --- |

DE
The Honorable William A. Knox, United States Magistrate Judge for the

1

Western District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-3726

___________

Ini Watson, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the 

Capital Region Medical Center; * Western District of Missouri.

Ken Belt; Carla Hahn; Rita Stitsel, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: April 23, 1998

 Filed: April 28, 1998 

___________

Before FAGG, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Ini Watson appeals the district court&s grant of summary judgment to one

1

defendant and the dismissal of three others in her action brought under Title VII, 42

U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000e-17. After a careful review of the record and the parties&

submissions on appeal, we conclude the district court was correct and an extended
-2-

discussion is unnecessary. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EXHIBIT 4.1
                          

                          CERTIFICATE OF INCREASE

                                    OF

                         SERIES A PREFERRED STOCK

                                    OF

                 TALLEY MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY, INC.

                    (Pursuant to Section 151(g) of the
                     Delaware General Corporation Law)


     Talley Manufacturing and Technology, Inc., a corporation organized 
          
and existing under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware 

(the "Corporation") does hereby certify:
          
          FIRST:    In a Certificate of Designation filed with
     the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on
     October 18, 1993, pursuant to Section 151 of the General
     Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, the Corporation
     was authorized to issue twenty (20) shares of Series A
     Preferred Stock, as a series of the Corporation's
     authorized Preferred Stock, par value $1.00 per share;

          SECOND:   The board of directors of the Corporation
     by resolution adopted as of September 12, 1996, duly
     authorized and directed that the number of authorized
     shares of the Corporation's Series A Preferred Stock be
     increased to one hundred (100) shares.

     In witness whereof, the Corporation has caused this Certificate to be 
     
signed by its duly authorized officer as of the 12th day of September, 1996.


                         TALLEY MANUFACTURING AND
                         TECHNOLOGY, INC.


                         By:     Mark S. Dickerson              
                                 ---------------------------------
                         Name:   Mark S. Dickerson              
                         Title:  Secretary
Amilcar C. BUTLER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8868.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
**EXHIBIT
      24.1**














**POWER
      OF ATTORNEY**








The
      undersigned, a member of the Board of Directors or an officer of MIDAMERICAN
      ENERGY HOLDINGS COMPANY, an Iowa corporation (the "Company"), hereby constitutes
      and appoints Douglas L. Anderson and Paul J. Leighton and each of them, as
      his/her true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of
      substitution and resubstitution, for and in his/her stead, in any and all
      capacities, to sign on his/her behalf the Company's Form 10-K Annual Report
      for
      the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005 and to execute any amendments thereto
      and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and all other documents in
      connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission and applicable
      stock exchanges, with the full power and authority to do and perform each and
      every act and thing necessary or advisable to all intents and purposes as he/she
      might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
      attorney-in-fact and agent, or his/her substitute or substitutes, may lawfully
      do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.





Executed
      as of March 3, 2006





/s/
                David L. Sokol
            
            /s/
                Gregory E. AbelDAVID
                L. SOKOL
            
            GREGORY
                E. ABEL/s/
                Patrick J. Goodman
            
            /s/
                Warren E. BuffettPATRICK
                J. GOODMAN
            
            WARREN
                E. BUFFETT/s/
                Marc D. Hamburg
            
            /s/
                Walter Scott, Jr.MARC
                D. HAMBURG
            
            WALTER
                SCOTT, JR.
Zack Zafer DYAB, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8996.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TIMOTHY LEE HATTEN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-1111

[July 9, 2020]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit; Palm Beach County, Jeffrey Dana Gillen, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 501985CF006720BXXXMB.

Timothy Lee Hatten, West Palm Beach, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, CIKLIN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.