alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas September 12, 2022 No. 04-22-00373-CR Hector RIVERAJr., Appellant
v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CRB000096D2 Honorable Monica Z. Notzon, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R Appellant’s brief is due September 16, 2022. He has filed a motion for a ninety-day extension of time to file the brief. The motion is granted in part . We orderappellant’s brief to be filed no later than November 15, 2022 . Counsel is cautioned that the court does not ordinarily grant extensions of more than sixty days beyond the original due date. 4 TH T EX . A PP . (San Antonio) L OC . R. 8, Notes and Comments.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 12th day of September, 2022.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 4.21


 


English Translation


 


Supplementary
Agreement


 


	Guarantor (Party A): 	Li Xianshou
	 	 
	 	Lian Xiahe
	 	 
	Creditor (Party B): 	China Construction Bank Corporation, Meishan Branch


 


 


Whereas, the amount of debts under the principal
contract for which Party A assume joint and several guarantee liability for Sichuan ReneSola Silicon Material Co., Ltd. (the “Debtor”)
is decreased, after reaching mutual agreement by Party A and Party B through consultation, this Supplementary Agreement is made
and entered into with respect to the Natural Person Maximum Amount Guarantee Contract numbered Jian Mei Zi Ran Ren Zui Gao E
2009001 which was signed by both parties on January 23, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the “Original Contract”)
for mutual compliance.


 


Article 1.                       
Clause (2) of Article 1 “Scope of Guarantee and Maximum Debt Amount” under the Original Contract shall be revised as
follows: the maximum amount to be guaranteed under the Maximum Amount Guarantee hereunder shall equal to (Currency) Renminbi
(Amount in Words) FIVE HUNDRED AND TWENTY MILLION. If Party A has performed its guarantee obligations pursuant to this Contract,
such maximum amount shall be decreased accordingly by the amount repaid by Party A.


 


Article 2.                       
This Agreement shall take effect after Party A or their authorized representatives and the principal or authorized representative
of Party B sign their names and affix their company seals.


 


Article 3.                       
This Agreement shall constitute an integral part of the Original Contract and shall have the same legal effect as the Original
Contract. Should there be any discrepancies between this Agreement and the Original Contract, this Agreement shall prevail. If
there are any provisions uncovered by this Agreement, the Original Contract shall apply.


 


 


 


	
        Party A or Authorized Representative (Signature):

         

        /s/ Li Xianshou                    /s/ Lian Xiahe
	
        Party B: (Company Seal) 

         

        [Company Seal affixed]

	
        [Finger Prints affixed]

         
	
         

        Principal or Authorized

        Representative (Signature): /s/ Liang Yuping

	 	 
	February 29, 2012	Date:
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2311

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain ion-exchange resin.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 22, 1999

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

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain ion-exchange

resin.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON CERTAIN ION-EX4 CHANGE RESIN.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new subheading:
2

•HR 2311 IH

‘‘ 9902.39.31 Ion-exchange

resin, comprising

a copolymer of 2-

propenenitrile

with 1,2,4-

triethenylcyclohexane, hydrolyzed

(CAS No.

109961-42-4)

(provided for in

subheading

3914.00.60) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

4 the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ
```
 
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 06/04/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      140,702
COMMITMENTS
  36,265   31,760   11,732   73,482   74,015  121,479  117,507   19,223   23,195

CHANGES FROM 05/28/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -1,518)
    -722      828     -999   -1,320   -1,991   -3,041   -2,162    1,523      644

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    25.8     22.6      8.3     52.2     52.6     86.3     83.5     13.7     16.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      172)
      40       41       38       58       68      123      128
```

----

Updated June 7, 2013
Jeff ANDERSEN, Secretary, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, petitioner, v. PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF KANSAS AND MID-MISSOURI, et al.

No. 17-1340.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied. Justice THOMAS, with whom Justice ALITO and Justice GORSUCH join, dissenting from denial of certiorari: I dissent for the reasons set out in *Gee v. Planned Parenthood,* 586 U.S. ----, 139 S.Ct. 408, --- L.E.2d ---- (2018) (Thomas, J., dissenting).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

AKOUSTIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET 

AL.

v.

QORVO, INC.

§

§

§

§

§

§

Case No. 2:23-CV-0180-JRG-RSP

Motion Hearing

MAG. JUDGE ROY PAYNE PRESIDING

April 13, 2024

OPEN: 2:03 pm ADJOURN: 3:21 pm 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF: John Campbell

Kyle Ryman

Sam Baxter

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS: Robert Masters

Jennifer Ayers

LAW CLERK: Joshua Scheufler

COURT REPORTER: Shawn McRoberts

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Becky Andrews

Court opened. Case called. Sam Baxter introduced co-counsel and announced ready. Robert 

Masters introduced co-counsel and announced ready.

Kyle Ryman argued Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Financial Discovery into the Accused 

Instrumentalities (Dkt. No. 86). Jennifer Ayers responded. 

The Court instructed the parties to file a motion if they want to amend their invalidity and 

infringement contentions.

After the break, Ms. Ayers informed the Court of the agreements made. John Campbell 

responded. 

Robert Masters responded regarding the schedule. Mr. Campbell also responded. 

The motion is DENIED AS MOOT for the reasons orally assigned.

Case 2:23-cv-00180-JRG-RSP Document 130 Filed 08/13/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 4494
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23.2

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our report dated March 27, 2007, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements included in the Annual Report of Easylink Services
Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration
Statements of Easylink Services Corporation on Forms S-3 (File No. 333-41154,
333-41156, 333-43060, 333-59776, and 333-76578) and Forms S-8 (File No.
333-135334, 333-96151, 333-31356, 333-39586, 333-97437 and 333-107737).


/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

Edison, New Jersey
March 27, 2007


                                       71
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 09/17/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      427,065
COMMITMENTS
  96,285  187,302   74,378  230,483  136,015  401,146  397,695   25,919   29,370

CHANGES FROM 09/10/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     42,470)
   6,723   -1,718    8,239   26,154   33,763   41,116   40,284    1,354    2,186

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    22.5     43.9     17.4     54.0     31.8     93.9     93.1      6.1      6.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      166)
      52       66       61       36       37      121      138
```

----

Updated September 20, 2013
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 39764

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

CHRISTOPHER KEITH COLE,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 758

Filed: December 7, 2012

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Kootenai County. Hon. Benjamin R. Simpson, District Judge. 

Order granting I.C.R. 35 motion for reduction of sentence, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Sarah E. Tompkins, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and GUTIERREZ, Judge

PER CURIAM

Christopher Keith Cole pled guilty to stalking in the first degree. Idaho Code §§ 18-

7905, 18-7906(2)(a). The district court sentenced Cole to a unified term of five years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of two years. Cole filed a timely Idaho Criminal Rule 35 

motion for a reduction of sentence, requesting that the district court place him in the retained 

jurisdiction program. The district court granted the motion, vacated Cole’s sentence, and ordered 

a psychological evaluation. At the subsequent resentencing hearing, the district court imposed a 

unified sentence of five years with two years determinate and retained jurisdiction. Cole appeals

asserting that the district court erred by not further reducing his sentence under Rule 35.

The doctrine of invited error applies to estop a party from asserting an error when his or 

her own conduct induces the commission of the error. Thomson v. Olsen, 147 Idaho 99, 106, 205 
2

P.3d 1235, 1242 (2009). One may not complain of errors one has consented to or acquiesced in. 

Id. In short, invited errors are not reversible. Id. This doctrine applies to sentencing decisions 

as well as rulings made during trial. State v. Leyva, 117 Idaho 462, 465, 788 P.2d 864, 867 (Ct. 

App. 1990). Having requested the sentencing determination he received, Cole cannot now 

challenge the district court’s sentencing determination as an abuse of the court’s discretion.

Therefore, the district court’s order granting Cole’s I.C.R. 35 motion is affirmed.
No. 6:23-cv-00054

Fred A. Dixon, Jr.,

Plaintiff,

v.

Skyview Correspondent, 

Defendant.

ORD ER

Plaintiff Fred A. Dixon, Jr., an inmate of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice proceeding pro se, filed this lawsuit complaining of alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights. The

case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love.

The magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the 

lawsuit be dismissed under the three-strike provision of 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(g) and because plaintiff failed to show that he has satisfied 

sanctions previously imposed on him by the Northern District of 

Texas. Plaintiff received a copy of the report on or before February 24, 2023, and has filed no objections.

When there have been no timely objections to a magistrate 

judge’s report and recommendation, the court reviews it only for 

clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 

1420 (5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report and being satisfied that it contains no clear error, the court 

accepts its findings and recommendation. Plaintiff is denied in 

forma pauperis status and the case is dismissed with prejudice for 

purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis, but without prejudice 

to the refiling of the lawsuit with payment of the full filing fee. 

Should plaintiff refile his lawsuit, he must also show receipt of 

permission from a judge of this court to file a lawsuit and proof of 

satisfaction of the $100.00 sanction imposed by the Northern District of Texas.

Case 6:23-cv-00054-JCB-JDL Document 4 Filed 05/19/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 8
- 2 -

So ordered by the court on May 19, 2023.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cv-00054-JCB-JDL Document 4 Filed 05/19/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 9
FATHER, petitioner, v. MAINE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al.

No. 17-1544.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine denied.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 06/11/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      552,790
COMMITMENTS
  98,350   37,820  134,161  303,282  360,625  535,793  532,606   16,997   20,184

CHANGES FROM 06/04/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     18,677)
   4,200   -4,398   10,329    4,979   15,104   19,508   21,035     -831   -2,358

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    17.8      6.8     24.3     54.9     65.2     96.9     96.3      3.1      3.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      157)
      45       40       60       66       66      139      141
```

----

Updated June 14, 2013
Amed Antonio SOLIS-ALONZO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8703.

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.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 12.1

                       RACI Holding, Inc. and Subsidiaries
         Statement RE: Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                              (Dollars in Millions)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                            Year Ended December 31,
                                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2000           1999          1998         1997           1996
                                                      -----------    -----------  ------------  ------------   -----------
<S>                                                       <C>            <C>           <C>            <C>         <C>
Earnings:

      Net Income                                          $ 19.9         $ 23.0        $ 17.2         $ 5.5       $ (13.8)
      Add:
           Income Taxes                                     12.5           14.7          11.1           3.5          (7.0)
           Interest Expense (a)                             15.6           14.1          19.2          23.6          25.1
           Portion of Rents
                Representative of
                Interest Factor                              0.1            0.1           0.1           0.3           0.3
                                                      -----------    -----------  ------------  ------------   -----------
                                                          $ 48.1         $ 51.9        $ 47.6        $ 32.9         $ 4.6
                                                      ===========    ===========  ============  ============   ===========

Fixed Charges:
      Interest Expense (a)                                $ 15.6         $ 14.1        $ 19.2        $ 23.6        $ 25.1
      Capitalized Interest                                   0.5              -             -           0.2           0.2
      Portion of Rents
           Representative of
           Interest Factor                                   0.1            0.1           0.1           0.1           0.1
                                                      -----------    -----------  ------------  ------------   -----------
                                                          $ 16.2         $ 14.2        $ 19.3        $ 23.9        $ 25.4
                                                      ===========    ===========  ============  ============   ===========

           Ratio of Earnings to
           Fixed Charges                                    3.0x           3.7x          2.5x          1.4x          0.2x
</TABLE>


(a) Includes amortization of discount on indebtedness and excludes capitalized
    interest.
<PAGE>



                                  EXHIBIT 32.1


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

         In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
Hi-Shear Technology Corporation for the year ended May 31, 2003, I, George W.
Trahan, President, Chief Executive Officer and Co-chairman of Hi-Shear
Technology Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best
of my knowledge and belief, that:

         (1) such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 2003,
         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 such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for
         the year ended May 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects,
         the financial condition and results of operations of Hi-Shear
         Technology Corporation.


                           /S/ GEORGE W. TRAHAN
                           --------------------
                           George W. Trahan
                           President, Chief Executive Officer and Co-chairman

September 19, 2003

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 Hi-Shear Technology Corporation
and will be retained by Hi-Shear Technology Corporation and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Sean M. DONAHUE, petitioner, v. PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 17-8422.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 6, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Jess Lee GREEN, Petitioner, v. Joe ERRINGTON.

No. 19-7028

Supreme Court of the United States.

February 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00591-CV

In the Interest of M.G.G., a child

On Appeal from the

197th District Court of Willacy County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2021-CV-0282-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 20, 2023
Quentin Eugene BELL, petitioner, v. Chuck KEETON, Warden.

No. 17-8690.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

COBBLESTONE WIRELESS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

V.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC.; 

Defendants.

Case No. 2:23-cv-00285-JRG-RSP 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO WITHDRAW ITS 

MOTION TO COMPEL

The Court considered Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Withdraw its Motion to Compel 

and is of the opinion that it should be granted. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Withdraw its Motion to Compel is GRANTED, and 

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of All Discovery Withheld Pending MOTIE Review, 

Dkt. 52, is WITHDRAWN. Plaintiff has leave to re-raise the issue and seek expedite briefing if 

MOTIE-related production is found later to be incomplete.

Case 2:23-cv-00285-JRG-RSP Document 53-1 Filed 05/15/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 881
Opinion issued June 27 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 18
- 00965
- CV

——————————— ALAN BATTLE , Appella nt

V. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC , Appell e e
On Appeal from the 412th District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 92352
- CV

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Alan Battle , ha s neither paid the required fees nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 5, 20.1; see also T EX
. G OV ’ T C ODE §§ 51.207, 51.941(a), 101.041; Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi

- DistrictLitigation, Misc. Docket No. 15

- 9158 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2015). After being notified that

this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 5, 42.3(c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees. We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Kelly, and Goodman

.
Bruce WOOD, petitioner, v. DELAWARE.

No. 18-6586.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Delaware denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 23

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors
Kellstrom Industries, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-20727, No. 333-41159, No. 333-62247 and No. 333-80015) on Form S-8 and in
the registration statements (No. 333-10313, No. 333-44019 and No. 333-52917) on
Form S-3 of Kellstrom Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated
March 28, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Kellstrom
Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and
comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2000, and the related financial statement
schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2000 annual report on Form
10-K of Kellstrom Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries.


Fort Lauderdale, Florida
April 9, 2001
Tanya RAMIREZ, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 18-445.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteen District denied.