alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion issued April 21, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-19-00627-CV

———————————

IN RE JEFFERY WAYNE BLACKBURN, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Jeffery Wayne Blackburn,

1 hasfiled a petition for a writ of mandamus 

challenging two orders entered by the trial court striking certain counteraffidavits 

1 The spelling of relator’s name varies throughout the record. Our style of the case is 

in accord with the trial court’s orders at issue in this original proceeding. See Owens 

v. Handyside, 478 S.W3d 172, 175, n.1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2015, pet. 

denied) (clarifying style of case); see also Strobel v. Marlow, 341 S.W.3d 470, 471 

n.1 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, no pet.).
2

concerning medical expenses.

2

 See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 18.001. To be 

entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show that the trial court clearly abused 

its discretion and that there is no adequate remedy by appeal. In re Prudential Ins. 

Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–136 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Relator has 

not demonstrated that he lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. See Walker v. Packer, 

827 S.W.2d 833, 842 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding) (holding “an appellate remedy 

is not inadequate merely because it may involve more expense or delay than 

obtaining an extraordinary writ”); see also In re Flores, No. 01-19-00484-CV, 2020 

WL 425297, *2–3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Jan. 28, 2020, orig. proceeding) 

(mem. op.) (denying relators’ petition for writ of mandamus challenging trial court’s 

exclusion of counteraffidavits offered pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies 

Code section 18.001).

Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for a writ of mandamus. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 52.8(a), (d). Any pending motions are dismissed as moot. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Lloyd, and Hightower.

2 The underlying case is Belinda Lamonto and Linda Bendickson v. Jeffery Wayne 

Blackburn, Cause No. 2017-80112, in the 113th District Court of Harris County, 

Texas, the Honorable Rabeea Sultan Collier presiding.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                        INTELLIGENT MEDICAL IMAGING, INC.
                        COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE

                                           THREE MONTHS    THREE MONTHS    NINE MONTH      NINE MONTHS
                                               ENDED            ENDED          ENDED          ENDED
                                           SEPT. 30, 1996  SEPT. 30, 1995  SEPT. 30, 1996  SEPT. 30, 1995
                                           -------------------------------------------------------------- 
<S>                                        <C>              <C>             <C>              <C>
Net loss before extraordinary item         $(1,255,244)     $(1,175,009)    $(1,695,532)     $(2,937,898)
Extraordinary gain on                      
extinguishment of debt                               -          157,494               -          157,494
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      
Net loss                                   $(1,255,244)     $(1,017,515)    $(1,695,532)     $(2,780,404)
                                           ============================================================== 

Weighted average common shares
outstanding                                 10,836,254        4,349,958       9,616,735        4,345,453

Shares related to Staff
Accounting Bulletin 83:
  Stock options and warrants granted                 -          468,345               -          468,345
  Issuance of common stock                           -        2,039,963               -        2,039,963
                                           --------------------------------------------------------------

Weighted average common shares                               
outstanding                                 10,836,254        6,858,266       9,616,735        6,853,761
                                           ==============================================================

Net loss per common share:
  Before extraordinary item                $     (0.12)     $     (0.17)    $    (0.18)       $    (0.43)
  Extraordinary gain on early
  extinguishment of debt                             -             0.02              -              0.02
                                           --------------------------------------------------------------
Net loss per common share                  $     (0.12)     $     (0.15)    $    (0.18)       $    (0.41)
                                           ==============================================================

</TABLE>
STATE v. Tyrone BRINKLEY.

No. 188P02-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 27, 2007.

Joan M. Cunningham, Assistant Attorney General, Michael Nifong, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th day of April 2007 by Defendant for "Petition for Discretionary Review":

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 27th day of June 2007."
In the Matter of N.G.

No. 510A07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 16, 2007.

Marshall Woodall, Lillington, for Harnett County DSS.

Lisa Skinner Lefler, for Father.

Elizabeth Boone, for Guardian ad Litem.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th day of November 2007 by Respondent (Mother) for extension of time:

"Motion Allowed. Respondent (Mother) shall have up to and including the 17th day of December 2007 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 16th day of November 2007."
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6078

MICHAEL PAUL PUZEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN FCC ALLENWOOD,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief

District Judge. (3:15-cv-00067-GMG-MJA)

Submitted: June 23, 2016 Decided: June 28, 2016

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Paul Puzey, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Paul Puzey, a federal prisoner, appeals the 

district court’s order denying his motion to alter or amend the 

district court’s prior order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2241 (2012) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by 

the district court. Puzey v. Warden, No. 3:15-cv-00067-GMG-MJA

(N.D. W. Va. Jan. 7, 2016). 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
In the Matter of J.J.

No. 15A07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 23, 2007.

Katharine Chester, for Mother.

Jil Sanchez, for Gaston County DSS.

Laura Crawford, for Perry Bobbin.

Ed Bogle, Gastonia, for Guardian Ad Litem.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st day of August 2007 by Respondent (Mother) for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Respondent (Mother) shall have up to and including the 29th day of August 2007 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 23rd day of August 2007."

HUDSON, J., recused.
---

##### Form 10-Q Table of Contents

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 EDEN Bioscience Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bradley
S. Powell, 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, that:

(1)       
          The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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

Dated: August 5, 2003

| |  |  |                                                                                                      
| |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  | /s/ Bradley S. PowellBradley S. PowellVice President of Finance, Chief FinancialOfficer and Secretary
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC v. Charles G. COUCH, Jr., Joe C. Young, Trustee, U/A/ Dated December 24, 1992 with Wayne T. Upchurch and Elizabeth C. Upchurch, Known as the Barry Upchurch Trust, Joe C. Young, Trustee, U/A/ Dated December 24, 1992 with Wayne T. Upchurch and Elizabeth C. Upchurch, Known as the Graves Upchurch Trust.

No. 412PA06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

Burley B. Mitchell, Jr., Raleigh, Mark P. Henriques, Sarah A. Motley, Charlotte, for Level 3 Communications.

Bruce M. Simpson, Charlotte, for Couch, et al.

*AMENDED ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th day of August 2006 by Petitioner in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, 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 3rd day of May 2007."

Petitioner shall forthwith submit an appeal bond to this Court, as provided by Appellate Rule 17(b). The bond may be in cash or by a written undertaking with good and sufficient surety in the sum of $250.00.

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).

Justice HUDSON recused.
SUPREME COURT, et al. v. Billy LAND.

No. 178P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 18, 2007.

Kathleen U. Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of April 2007 by Defendant for "Notice of Appeal":

"Motion Dismissed ex mero motu by order of the Court in conference this the 18th day of April 2007."
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 4, 2021

b0601

Order 

Clerk

June 4, 2021

162009

JAMES DUCKWORTH,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

and

ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY,

Intervening Plaintiff,

v SC: 162009

COA: 347865 

Wayne CC: 14-005196-NF;

CHEROKEE INSURANCE COMPANY, 15-006418-NF

Defendant-Appellant,

and

PROGRESSIVE MARATHON INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 6, 2020 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1 D 2 0 2 3

- 2118

_____________________________
L ARRY C LARK , Appellant,

v.

F LORIDA C OMMISSION ON O FFENDER R EVIEW , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. Angela C. Dempsey , Judge

.

March 27, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

R AY , K ELSEY , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Larry Clark
, pro se, Appellant.2 No Appe a rance for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7234

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM D. LONGENETTE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (CR-90-136) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 6, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. William D. Longenette, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* The motion to expedite the appeal, filed on November 29, 2001, became moot on the filing of this opinion and, accordingly, is dismissed. 2 PER CURIAM: William D. Longenette appeals from the district court’s March 7, 2001, order denying relief on his claims regarding his fine and incarceration and the court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We dismiss the appeal from the March 7, 2001, order for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was filedbeyond the sixty-day appeal period. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). Regarding the district court’s order denying Longenette’s Rule 60(b)motion, we have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. * United States v. Longenette, No. CR-90-136 (N.D.W. Va. July 9, 2001); United States v. Williams , 674 F.2d 310, 313 (4th Cir. 1982). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART
Exhibit 32.1

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO>
18 U.S.C. SS.1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of Orphan Medical, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John H.
Bullion, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.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/   John H. Bullion                                   | 
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------- | 
| |  |                                                        
| |  | John H. BullionChief Executive OfficerNovember 14, 2003 | 

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Orphan Medical, Inc. and will be
retained by Orphan Medical, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.

34

---
### COURT OF APPEALS Thirteenth District Corpus Christi

– Edinburg, Texas
Below is the JUDGMENT in the numbered cause set out herein to be Filed and Entered in the Minutes of the Court of Appeals, Thirteenth District of Texas, at Corpus Christi

– Edinburg, as of the 3rd day of October, 2013 . If this Judgment does not conform to the opinion handed down by the Court in this cause, any party may file a Motion for Correction of Judgment with the Clerk of this Court.
CAUSE NO. 13

- 12

- 00034

- CV (Tr.Ct.No. 46376

- 2

- C)

JOHN E. FOX , Appellant,

v.

DONNA A. FOX , Appellee

.

On appeal to this Court from Nueces County, Texas

.

 

## JUDGMENT
On appeal from the County Court at Law No

. 2 of Nueces County, Texas, from a judgment signed February 10, 2011 . Me morandum Opinion Per Curiam. THIS CAUSE was submitted to the Court on October 3, 2013, on the record, the Court’s order dated August 26, 2013, and the parties’ failure to respond to the Court’s directive

. The Court, having examined and fully considered t he documents on file , is of the opinion that the appeal should be reinstated and dismissed for want of prosecution. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby REINSTATED and DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant , JOHN E. FOX. It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance.

 DORIAN E. RAMIREZ , CLERK
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THERMOSPECTRA CORPORATION'S
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED OCTOBER 2, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000

<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  OCT-02-1999
<CASH>                                                  8,990
<SECURITIES>                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          39,166
<ALLOWANCES>                                            2,154
<INVENTORY>                                            27,560
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       94,536
<PP&E>                                                 32,398
<DEPRECIATION>                                         16,571
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        234,802
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  91,557
<BONDS>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                  154
<OTHER-SE>                                            131,003
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          234,802
<SALES>                                               129,121
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      129,121
<CGS>                                                  76,496
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          76,496
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          894
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          264
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     (2,471)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         2,976
<INCOME-TAX>                                            1,429
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     1,547
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                            1,547
<EPS-BASIC>                                            0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0.10


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1





Certifications Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with the Annual Report of NovaDel Pharma Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Steven B. Ratoff, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350), that to his 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 results of operations of the Company.








Date:  March 31, 2010
By:
/s/ STEVEN B. RATOFFSteven B. Ratoff(principal executive officer and principal financial officer)





A signed original 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 certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.
II 

Calendar No. 1072 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3350 

To provide that claims of the United States to certain documents relating 

to Franklin Delano Roosevelt shall be treated as waived and relinquished 

in certain circumstances. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 28, 2008 

Mr. SCHUMER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

SEPTEMBER 24 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 17), 2008 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

A BILL 

To provide that claims of the United States to certain documents relating to Franklin Delano Roosevelt shall be 

treated as waived and relinquished in certain circumstances. 

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


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•S 3350 RS

1 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN DOC2 UMENTS RELATING TO FRANKLIN DELANO 

3 ROOSEVELT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—If any person makes a gift of any 

5 property described in subsection (b) to the National Ar6 chives and Records Administration, then any claim of the 

7 United States to such property shall be treated as having 

8 been waived and relinquished on the day before the date 

9 of such gift. 

10 (b) PROPERTY DESCRIBED.—Property is described in 

11 this subsection if such property is a part of the collection 

12 of documents, papers, and memorabilia relating to Frank13 lin Delano Roosevelt, or any member of his family or staff, 

14 which was originally in the possession of Grace Tully and 

15 retained by her at the time of her death, and included 

16 in her estate. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Calendar No. 1072 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3350 

A BILL 

To provide that claims of the United States to cerin certain circumstances. sevelt shall be treated as waived and relinquished tain documents relating to Franklin Delano RooSEPTEMBER 24 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 17), 2008 

Reported without amendment 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1
 ASSISTED LIVING CONCEPTS, INC.
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  1.
    
    The report fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and2.
    
    The information contained in the
report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of
the registrant.
 /s/ Laurie A. BeboLaurie A. BeboChief Executive OfficerAugust 9, 2010/s/ John BuonoJohn BuonoChief Financial OfficerAugust 9, 2010