alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed February 26, 2018.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-18-00014-CV

TE LUN WANG, Appellant

V.

XIANGYU CAO, SI HAN, RUOTIAN LI, AND LINGCHAO CHEN, Appellees

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-04995-2017

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Evans, and Justice Brown

Opinion by Justice Brown

Appellant appeals from an interlocutory order granting appellees’ motions to dismiss under 

chapter 27 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. 27.003 

(West 2017). Before the Court is appellee Lingchao Chen’s February 2, 2018 motion to dismiss 

the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Appellee asserts in the motion that the appealed order is not 

subject to an interlocutory appeal. Appellant did not file a response to the motion. 

Generally, this Court has jurisdiction only over final judgments and certain interlocutory 

orders as permitted by statute. See Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). 

A final judgment is one that disposes of all parties and all claims. See id. Additionally, only 

interlocutory orders denying a chapter 27 motion to dismiss are appealable. See TEX. CIV. PRAC.

& REM. 51.014(a)(12) (West 2017).
–2–

In the notice of appeal, appellant states she is appealing the “final order” granting 

appellees’ motions to dismiss. In the motion to dismiss, appellee explains that he has 

counterclaims that remain pending. Accordingly, the order granting the chapter 27 motions to 

dismiss is interlocutory as it did not dispose of all pending claims. See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at

195. Moreover, the order is not subject to an interlocutory appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.

51.014(a)(12) (West 2017).

Because the appealed order is neither final nor an appealable interlocutory order, we grant 

appellee’s motion and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

180014F.P05

/Ada Brown/

ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

TE LUN WANG, Appellant

No. 05-18-00014-CV V.

XIANGYU CAO, SI HAN, RUOTIAN LI, 

AND LINGCHAO CHEN, Appellees

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District 

Court, Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-04995-2017.

Opinion delivered by Justice Brown. Chief 

Justice Wright and Justice Evans 

participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellees XIANGYU CAO, SI HAN, RUOTIAN LI, AND 

LINGCHAO CHEN recover their costs of this appeal from appellant TE LUN WANG.

Judgment entered this 26th day of February, 2018.
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 Quarterly Report of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 27, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Lawrence J. Blanford, as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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.

Date: August 3, 2009



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Lawrence J. Blanford             
|Lawrence J. Blanford*                
|President and Chief Executive Officer



|* | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. and will be retained by Green Mountain Coffee
Roasters, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The foregoing certification is being
furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate
disclosure document.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7240

ALBERT CURTIS MILLS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL 

SERVICES; MARYLAND DIVISION OF CORRECTION; LAWRENCE J. 

HOGAN, Governor; BOYD K. RUTHERFORD, Lieutenant Governor; JOHN DOE, 

Chief of Security; JOHN DOE, Major; CAPTAIN WALTER ISER; LIEUTENANT 

THOMAS SAWYERS; LIEUTENANT VAUGHN WHITEMAN; ROBERT L. 

GREEN, Secretary; JOHN DOE, Assistant Warden; SERGEANT APRIL CARR;

ICKES, Correctional Officer; JESSE RITCHEY, Correctional Officer II; JASON 

ELKINS, Correctional Officer II; RICHARD RODERICK, Correctional Case 

Management Manager; JOHN G. SINDY, Correctional Case Management 

Specialist; S. JOHNSON, Case Management Specialist; F. TODD TAYLOR, 

Executive Director; JEFF NINES, Warden; FRANK BISHOP; STEPHEN T. 

MOYER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. 

Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:20-cv-00432-DKC)

Submitted: January 26, 2022 Decided: February 9, 2022

Before AGEE and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7240 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/09/2022 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Albert Curtis Mills, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7240 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/09/2022 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Albert Curtis Mills appeals the district court’s order granting Appellees’ motions to 

dismiss Mills’ complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Mills v. Md. Dep’t of 

Pub. Safety, No. 8:20-cv-00432-DKC (D. Md. Aug. 9, 2021). 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

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7240 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/09/2022 Pg: 3 of 3
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DERRICK VERNON COLE,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.
EDUCATIONAL CREDIT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 17

- 56924
D.C. No. 5:17

- cv - 00974

- JFW

- SP

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 15, 2018 **

Before: SILVERMAN , BEA, and WATFORD , Circuit Judges

. Derrick Vernon Cole appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
and state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an

abuse of discretion a d istrict court’s dismissal pursuant to its local rules. Ghazali

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimous ly concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 56924

v. Moran , 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Cole’s action
because Cole did not file an opposition to defendant’s motion for judgment on the
pleadings , or request an extension of time to do so. See id. at 53

- 54 (discussing factors to guide the court’s evaluation of dismissal pursuant to local rules); see also

C.D. Cal. R. 7

- 9 (requiring the filing of an opposition or statem ent of non

opposition to a motion no later than twenty

- one days before the scheduled hearing
date); C.D. Cal. R. 7

- 12 (providing that the failure to file a required document may

be deemed consent to the granting of the motion); Harman v. Apfel , 211 F.3d 11 72, 1175 (9th Cir. 2000) (“[T]he decision of a trial court is reversed under the abuse of
discretion standard only when the appellate court is convinced firmly that the
reviewed decision lies beyond the pale of reasonable justification under the

circumstan ces.”).
In light of our disposition, we do n ot consider the merits of Cole’s claims.
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
DEX MEDIA, INC., petitioner, v. CLICK-TO-CALL TECHNOLOGIES, LP, et al.

No. 18-916.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2019.

Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.
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 amended Annual Report of MidNet, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth
M. Fasnacht, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Kenneth M. Fasnacht
--------------------------------
Kenneth M. Fasnacht
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Date: September 8, 2004


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 MIDNET, INC. AND WILL BE RETAINED
BY MIDNET, INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS
STAFF UPON REQUEST.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000910632
<NAME>                        ICON Cash Flow Partners L.P. Six

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          4,858,361
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  52,399,438
<ALLOWANCES>                                      157,602
<INVENTORY>                                        81,931
<CURRENT-ASSETS> *                                      0
<PP&E>                                         17,063,797
<DEPRECIATION>                                     34,082
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 60,477,286
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES> **                                0
<BONDS>                                        19,714,599
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                     22,614,182
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   60,477,286
<SALES>                                         5,883,745
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                5,883,745
<CGS>                                           1,728,093
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                1,535,445
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   75,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              2,539,976
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         0
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     0
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                        5,231
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0.01
<FN>
*    The  Partnership  has  an  unclassified  balance  sheet  in  its  financial
     statements due to the nature of its industry.  A value of "0" was used for
     current assets and liabilities.

**   The  Partnership  has  an  unclassified  balance  sheet  in  its  financial
     statements due to the nature of its industry.  A value of "0" was used for
     current assets and liabilities.
</FN>

        


</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Acute Renal Injury Sequelae in NICU Graduates (ARISING).                    

*Date:*                         June 30, 2022.                    

*Time:*                         1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         NIH/NIDDK, Democracy Two, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Paul A. Rushing, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7345, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-8895,                         *rushingp@extra.niddk.nih.gov.*

                        (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research;                               ( print page 28840)                            93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)                    

Dated: May 5, 2022.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-10056 Filed 5-10-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 06/12/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      307,504
COMMITMENTS
  83,955   97,177   41,875  158,746  143,439  284,576  282,491   22,928   25,013

CHANGES FROM 06/05/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     30,489)
  17,541   11,559    2,426    8,796   13,226   28,763   27,211    1,726    3,278

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    27.3     31.6     13.6     51.6     46.6     92.5     91.9      7.5      8.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      129)
      30       51       49       35       38      100      112
```

----

Updated June 15, 2012
Edgar ARELLANO, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 18-8032.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District denied.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 11, 2022)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 29021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10326]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 11, 2022 / 
Presidential Documents

[[Page 29021]]


                Notice of May 9, 2022

                
Continuation of the National Emergency With 
                Respect to the Stabilization of Iraq

                On May 22, 2003, by Executive Order 13303, the 
                President declared a national emergency pursuant to the 
                International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 
                1701 et seq.) to deal with the unusual and 
                extraordinary threat to the national security and 
                foreign policy of the United States posed by obstacles 
                to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration 
                and maintenance of peace and security in the country, 
                and the development of political, administrative, and 
                economic institutions in Iraq.

                The obstacles to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, 
                the restoration and maintenance of peace and security 
                in the country, and the development of political, 
                administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq 
                continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to 
                the national security and foreign policy of the United 
                States. For this reason, the national emergency 
                declared in Executive Order 13303, as modified in scope 
                and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive 
                Order 13290 of March 20, 2003, Executive Order 13315 of 
                August 28, 2003, Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 
                2004, Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004, 
                Executive Order 13438 of July 17, 2007, and Executive 
                Order 13668 of May 27, 2014, must continue in effect 
                beyond May 22, 2022. Therefore, in accordance with 
                section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 
                U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the 
                national emergency with respect to the stabilization of 
                Iraq declared in Executive Order 13303.

                This notice shall be published in the Federal Register 
                and transmitted to the Congress.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    May 9, 2022.

[FR Doc. 2022-10326
Filed 5-10-22; 11:15 am]
Billing code 3395-F2-P
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-25,667-03

EX P ARTE TERRY LYNN DAVIS, Applicant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 23110A-422 IN THE 422ND DISTRICT COURT

F ROM K

AUF MAN C OUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967) . Applicant wa s convicted of possession of a controlled subst ance and sentenced to imprisonment for life . The F ifth Court of Appea ls aff irmed h i s conviction. Davis v. State , No. 05-06-00527- CR (Tex. App.—Dallas J une 13, 2007) (not designated f

or publication). Applicant contends that his sentenc e was illega lly order ed to run consec utively with another sent ence , he is actua lly innocent, and trial counsel failed to object to a “no knock” search and investigate extraneous misconduct e vidence

.On October 8, 2014, we rema nded this application b ecause the rec ord was prematurely forwa rded to this Court. On rema nd, the trial court recommended that we dismiss as moot Applicant’s claim that his sentenc e was illega lly order ed to run consec utively with another sentenc e. The trial court also conclude d that Applicant’s other grounds wer e without merit and rec ommended that we deny them. We agree . Acc ording ly , this application is dismiss ed in part and denied in part.

Filed: Mar ch 29, 2017 Do not publish