alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE of North Carolina v. Marlon Rio MASSEY.

No. 637A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 19, 2006.

Anne M. Middleton, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State.

*391C. Scott Holmes, Durham, for Marlon Rio Massey.

Prior report: 174 N.C.App. 216, 621 S.E.2d 633.

*AMENDED ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Attorney General on the 17th day of November 2005 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 19th day of December 2006."

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Attorney General on the 17th day of November 2005 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 19th day of December 2006."

Accordingly, the new brief of the Attorney General shall be filed with this Court not more than 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
# L_2013235EN.01001201.xml

| 4.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 235/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 235/12

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 200/2013 of 8 March 2013 approving the active substance ametoctradin, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 67 of 9 March 2013
  )

On page 4, in Annex I, in the third column:

for:

‘The impurities amitrole and o-xylene are of toxicological relevance and shall not exceed 50 g/kg and 2 g/kg respectively in the technical material.’,

read:

‘The impurities amitrole and o-xylene are of toxicological relevance and shall not exceed 50 mg/kg and 2 g/kg respectively in the technical material.’;

on page 5, in Annex II, in the fourth column:

for:

‘The impurities amitrole and o-xylene are of toxicological relevance and shall not exceed 50 g/kg and 2 g/kg respectively in the technical material.’,

read:

‘The impurities amitrole and o-xylene are of toxicological relevance and shall not exceed 50 mg/kg and 2 g/kg respectively in the technical material.’.

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Herbert CHAVIS.

No. 551P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 8, 2007.

Herbert Chavis, Pro Se.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, James R. Woodall, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 19th day of October 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Chatham County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed without prejudice by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th day of March 2007."
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           UT
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
consolidated  balance sheet of  MidAmerican  Energy  Company as of September 30,
1998, and the related  consolidated  statements of income and cash flows for the
nine months  ended  September  30,  1998,  and is  qualified  in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000928576
<NAME>                        MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY                   
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                   PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      2,607,812
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    164,360
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         259,762
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       312,874
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                 166,345
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,511,153
<COMMON>                                       560,595
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            431,870
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 992,465
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          150,000
<PREFERRED>                                    31,759
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           930,497
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                             0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                      0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 73,600
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  49,628
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                      0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                               0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 1,283,204
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  3,511,153
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      1,211,084
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           74,323
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     971,310
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     1,045,633
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        165,451
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                             2,176
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 167,627
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       66,524
<NET-INCOME>                                   101,103
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                    3,714
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  97,389
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       90,700
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      53,425
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         343,300
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        

</TABLE>
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5791 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to clarify the effective date of 

active duty of members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces 

receiving an alert order anticipating a call or order to active duty in 

support of a contingency operation for purposes of entitlement to medical 

and dental care as members of the Armed Forces on active duty. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 15, 2008 

Ms. SHEA-PORTER (for herself and Mr. LATHAM) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to clarify the effective date of active duty of members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces receiving an alert order anticipating a call or order to active duty in support of 

a contingency operation for purposes of entitlement to 

medical and dental care as members of the Armed Forces 

on active duty. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Guard and 

5 Reserve Readiness Act of 2008’’. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5791 IH

1 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE OF ACTIVE DUTY FOR PURPOSES 

2 OF ENTITLEMENT TO ACTIVE DUTY HEALTH 

3 CARE OF MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE COM4 PONENTS OF THE ARMED FORCES RECEIV5 ING ALERT ORDER ANTICIPATING A CALL OR 

6 ORDER TO ACTIVE DUTY IN SUPPORT OF A 

7 CONTINGENCY OPERATION. 

8 Subsection (d) of section 1074 of title 10, United 

9 States Code, is amended to read as follows: 

10 ‘‘(d)(1) For purposes of this chapter, a member of 

11 a reserve component of the armed forces shall be treated 

12 as a member of the armed forces on active duty as follows: 

13 ‘‘(A) On the date of the issuance of the alert 

14 order for the member’s unit in anticipation of the 

15 mobilization of the unit for service for a period of 

16 more than 30 days in support of a contingency oper17 ation. 

18 ‘‘(B) On the date of the issuance of the order 

19 providing for the assignment or attachment of the 

20 member to a unit subject to an alert order described 

21 in paragraph (1). 

22 ‘‘(2) If the alert order for a member’s unit (or the 

23 unit to which the member is assigned or attached) is re24 scinded, the member shall cease to be treated on active 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
3 

•HR 5791 IH

1 duty for purposes of this chapter as of the date of the 

2 issuance of the order rescinding such alert order.’’. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
NO. 12-18-00012-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE:

K. M., A CHILD, 

§

§

§

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

A.S. filed an original mandamus proceeding complaining of the trial court’s October 19, 

2017 temporary order restricting A.S.’s possession of K.M., a child, to only supervised access in 

a therapeutic setting. On February 21, 2018, this Court conditionally granted A.S.’s petition and 

directed Respondent to vacate his October 19 order. By an order signed on February 23, 

Respondent has complied with this Court’s opinion and order, rendering this proceeding moot. 

Accordingly, we dismiss A.S.’s petition for writ of mandamus as moot. 

Opinion delivered February 28, 2018.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

FEBRUARY 28, 2018

NO. 12-18-00012-CV

IN RE: K. M., A CHILD

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by A.S.; 

who is the relator in Cause No. 2017-269, pending on the docket of the 402nd Judicial District 

Court of Wood County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on 

January 23, 2018, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this 

Court that the writ should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED 

that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby dismissed as moot.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                        CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-13917, 333-14509, and 333-18851) pertaining to The SABRE
Group Holdings, Inc. 1996 Long-Term Incentive Plan, 1996 Directors Stock
Incentive Plan, and the Employee Stock Purchase Plan, respectively, of our
report dated January 19, 1998, except for Note 14, as to which the date is
February 27, 1998, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The
SABRE Group Holdings, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1997.


                                           ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Dallas, Texas
March 23, 1998



                                     58
JARIUS ISAIAH EDWARDS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-1486

_____________________________/

Opinion filed April 6, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. 

Angela C. Dempsey, Judge.

Ryan C. Morris, Foundation Legal, P.A., Orlando, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, 

and Matthew Pavese, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification 
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)

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), I, Dan R. Lee, Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer of Microtek Medical Holdings, Inc., a Georgia corporation (the
Company), do hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

This
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 (the Form
10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in this Form 10-Q fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

|November 8, 2005 | /s/ Dan R. Lee                                            
|---------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------
|                 | Dan R. Lee
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
##### 



(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 Dex Media West LLC as of the dates and for
the periods expressed in the Report.
 /s/ David C. Swanson
    
    
    
    /s/ Steven M. BlondyDavid C. Swanson
Chairman of the Board of Directors and
Chief Executive Officer
May 14, 2007
    
    
    
    Steven M. Blondy
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
May 14, 2007
  33
Exhibit 13.2

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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Minco Gold Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), I hereby 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 Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and                      
|2. | The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.







Date:

May 12, 2010





Paul Zhang

Paul Zhang, Chief Financial Officer























---
STATE of North Carolina v. Larry Anthony FINNEY.

No. 93PA06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

David G. Belser, Joel B. Stevenson, Asheville, for Larry Anthony Finney.

John P. Scherer, II, Assistant Attorney General, Ronald L. Moore, District Attorney, for State.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Attorney General on the 22nd day of February 2006 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of May 2007."
#### In the Matter of Philip Symmonds, Appellant, v Robert Dennison, as Chair of the New York State Board of Parole, et al., Respondents.

[801 NYS2d 90]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Ceresia, Jr., J), entered March 3, 2005 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Petitioner, convicted in 1983 of murder in the second degree and two counts of robbery in the first degree, is serving a prison sentence of 15 years to life stemming from the stabbing death *1172of the victim during a home robbery. Following his fourth appearance before the Board of Parole in October 2003, petitioner’s request for parole release was again denied. After an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and this appeal ensued.

We affirm. A review of the record belies petitioner’s contention that the Board based its determination solely on the instant nature of the offense without appropriate consideration of relevant statutory factors. The parole release interview and the Board’s decision demonstrate that the Board considered petitioner’s exemplary disciplinary record, positive institutional achievements, medical condition and plans upon release. Furthermore, the record establishes that the Board was aware of the specific role that petitioner played in the commission of the instant offense. Although the Board placed particular emphasis on the escalation of petitioner’s criminal history and nature of the instant offense, it is not required to give equal weight to or specifically discuss all factors it considered in making its determination *(see Matter of Mendez v New York State Bd. of Parole,*20 AD3d 742 [2005]; *Matter of Martin v Travis,*17 AD3d 884, 885 [2005], *appeal dismissed*5 NY3d 782 [2005]). Inasmuch as the determination resulted from an exercise of the Board’s discretion following consideration of relevant statutory factors *(see*Executive Law § 259-i), and petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the determination resulted from “ ‘irrationality bordering on impropriety’ ” *(Matter of Silmon v Travis,*95 NY2d 470, 476 [2000], quoting *Matter of Russo v New York State Bd. of Parole,*50 NY2d 69, 77 [1980]), the determination is not subject to further judicial review *(see*Executive Law § 259-i [5]; *Matter of Gamez v Dennison,*18 AD3d 1099 [2005]). Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on August 4, 2005, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), ASTM International—Standards (“ASTM”) has filed written notification simulatanously                           ( print page 50407)                        with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing additions or changes to its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purposes of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, ASTM has provided an updated list of current, ongoing ASTM standards   activities originating after April 1, 2005, designated as Work Items. A complete listing of ASTM Work Items, along with a brief description of each, is available at                     *http://www.astm.org.*

                    On September 15, 2004,  ASTM filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on November 10, 2004 (69 FR 65226).                

                     The last notification was filed  with the Department on April 12, 2005. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25110).                

                    For additional information, please contact: Thomas B. O'Brien, Jr., General Counsel, at ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428, telephone 610-832-9597, e-mail address                     *tobrien@astm.org.*

Dorothy Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 05-16960 Filed 8-25-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
<PAGE>


                                  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 Marketing Worldwide, Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
Marvin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
knowledge 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/ JAMES MARVIN
------------------------

James Marvin
Chief Financial Officer
Date: May 24, 2006

                                       27