alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTS



         We have issued our report  dated  January 24,  2002,  accompanying  the
consolidated  financial  statements and schedules  incorporated  by reference or
included in the Annual Report of TF Financial  Corporation  and  Subsidiaries on
Form  10-K for the year  ended  December  31,  2001.  We hereby  consent  to the
incorporation by reference of said report in the  Registration  Statements of TF
Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 (File No. 33-87176, effective
December  7, 1994,  File No.  333-09235,  effective  July 31,  1996 and File No.
333-27085, effective May 14, 1997).


/s/ Grant Thornton LLP


Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 26, 2002
NUMBER 13-20-00345-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

JAMES WILLIAMS, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 178th District Court 

of Harris County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina

Appellant, James Williams, attempts to appeal his conviction for aggravated 

assault entered in the 178th District Court of Harris County1. On June 10, 2020, the trial 

court sentenced appellant. On July 16, 2020, appellant filed a notice of appeal. On August 

1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Fourteenth Court of Appeals in Houston, pursuant to 

docket equalization order Misc. Docket No. 20-9090 issued by the Supreme Court of Texas.
2

20, 2020, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared the appeal was not 

timely perfected. Appellant was further informed the appeal would be dismissed if the 

defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive.

Furthermore, on August 25, 2020, this Court notified appellant’s counsel that the 

trial court’s certification indicated the appellant waived his right to appeal and ordered 

counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether appellant has a right to appeal; 

and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings as to whether appellant has a 

right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the existence of any amended 

certification.

On September 25, 2020, counsel filed a brief with this Court. The brief does not 

establish: (1) that the certification currently on file with this Court is incorrect, or (2) that

appellant otherwise has a right to appeal. The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 

provides that an appeal must be dismissed if the trial court’s certification does not show 

that the defendant has the right of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); see Tex. R. App. P. 

37.1, 44.3, 44.4. 

Furthermore, this Court's appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a 

timely filed notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). 

Absent a timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to 

address the merits of the appeal and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal 

for want of jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). 

Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION and the 

motion to withdraw is DISMISSED as moot.
3

JAIME TIJERINA

Justice

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the

21st day of January, 2021.
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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [MT-060-01-1020-PG] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Central Montana Resource Advisory Council (RAC) will meet as indicated below. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held October 19, 2005, at the Bureau of Land Management's Lewistown Field Office in Lewistown, Montana (920 NE. Main, in Lewistown, MT). The meeting will begin at 10 a.m. with a 30-minute public comment period. This meeting is scheduled to adjourn at 5:30 p.m. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This 15-member council advises the Secretary of the Interior on a variety of management issues associated with public land management in Montana. At this meeting the council will discuss/act upon:

The minutes of their proceeding meeting; 

Orientation of new council members; 

Field managers' updates; 

The BLM planning process; 

Range management programs; 

A presentation from American Prairie's Foundation; 

An overview of the monument resource management plan; and administrative details.

All meetings are open to the public. The public may present written comments to the RAC. Each formal RAC meeting will also have time allocated for hearing public comments. Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment and time available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATON CONTACT:

June Bailey, Lewistown Field Manager, Lewistown Field Office, P.O. Box 1160, Lewistown, Montana, 59457, (406) 538-1900. 

Dated: September 21, 2005. 

June Bailey, 

Lewistown Field Manager. 

[FR Doc. 05-19335 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, in the capacity as indicated below and 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, as amended, and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:                 November 16, 2009



/s/ Curtis W.
MewbourneCurtis W. MewbourneChief Executive OfficerMewbourne Development Corporation,Managing General Partner of the Registrant
**Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 December 2008 – Commission v Netherlands**

**(Case C‐249/07)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Directive 92/43/EC – Measure having equivalent effect – Prior authorisation for the planting of oysters and mussels of native species from other Member States – Justification – Protection of the life of animals – Maintenance of biodiversity and conservation of fish species in the interest of fisheries

1.                     *Environment – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 92/43 – Protection of the species (Council
Directive 92/43, Arts 12(1) and 22(b)) (see paras. 31, 34-37)*

2.                     *Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect (Arts 28 EC and 30 EC) (see paras 25-28,
43-46, 51-56)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – System of prior authorisation for the planting of oysters and mussels from other Member States in Netherlands coastal waters. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Declares that, by instituting a system of prior authorisation for the planting, in Netherlands coastal waters, of oysters and mussels coming lawfully from other Member States and being of species native to the Netherlands, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 28 EC and 30 EC; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs. |
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 33-97586, 33-97588 and 333-71453) of
our report dated February 05, 2004, relating to the consolidated balance sheets
of Western Ohio Financial Corporation as of December 31, 2003 and 2002 and the
related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, changes in
shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended December 31, 2003, which report is incorporated by reference in the
Company's annual report on form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.

/s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLC

Columbus, Ohio
March 26, 2004

                                                                              40
EX-10.5



 Exhibit 10.5 

AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE 

TO THE 
 WEST CORPORATION
NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 
 WHEREAS, West Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), maintains
the West Corporation Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective as of March 27, 2013 and amended by Amendment Number One dated as of April 24, 2013 and Amendment Number Two dated as of January 29, 2014
(the “Plan”); 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Article VIII of the Plan, the Company has the authority to amend the Plan; and 

WHEREAS, the Board has authorized an amendment of the Plan to facilitate participants making changes to notional investments in mutual
funds more frequently than quarterly and to provide the Company with additional time to complete distributions in accordance with applicable law. 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, effective as of July 30, 2014, as follows: 

1. The third sentence of Section 3.3 is hereby amended to delete the word “quarterly” prior to the word “by”. 

2. The third sentence of Section 6.1 is hereby amended to replace the words “sixty (60) days” with the words “ninety
(90) days”. 
 *** 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this instrument to be executed by its duly
authorized agent as of July 30, 2014. 
  

			
	WEST CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	/s/ Paul M. Mendlik
	Name:	 	Paul M. Mendlik
	Title:	 	Chief Financial Officer



  
 2
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 WCA Waste Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Charles A. Casalinova, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
  (1)
              The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d), as applicable, 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.
  By:
                /s/ Charles
      A. CasalinovaCharles
      A. CasalinovaChief
      Financial OfficerAugust
      7, 2008
   The
foregoing certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18
of the 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 Exchange Act, except to the extent that the
registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.
----

| 1. | Such      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending February 28, 2009,      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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period      ending February 28, 2009 fairly presents, in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of Sew Cal Logo,      Inc. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:    | /s/ Judy      Songer          |   |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Chief      Financial Officer  |   |

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-6420

MARCUS HUNTER, 

 Petitioner - Appellant, 

 v. 

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Department of Corrections, 

 Respondent - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. F. Bradford Stillman, 

Magistrate Judge. (2:07-cv-00269-FBS) 

Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 24, 2008 

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Marcus Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. Rosemary Virginia Bourne, 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
PER CURIAM: 

Marcus Hunter seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s 

order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as 

untimely.∗ The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the magistrate judge is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the 

magistrate judge is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Hunter has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

 ∗

This case was decided by the magistrate judge upon consent 

of the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000) and Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 73. 

2 
3 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

 

DISMISSED
Order entered May 24, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00033-CR

CHARLES WILLIAM BRYANT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Rockwall County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CR17-2311

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s May 24, 2019 first motion for extension of time to file his 

brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant’s brief due on or before June 25, 2019. 

Counsel is reminded that an attorney of record in an appeal may register on the Court’s 

website at www.txcourts.gov/5thcoa/ and access the reporter’s record via the attorney portal.

/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III 

JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 56768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19291]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee--Open Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee 
open meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given of a 
meeting of the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee 
(COMSTAC). The meeting will take place on Wednesday, October 26, 2005, 
starting at 8 a.m. at the Federal Aviation Administration Headquarters 
Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, in the Bessie 
Coleman Conference Center, located on the 2nd floor. This will be the 
forty-second meeting of the COMSTAC.
    The proposed agenda for the meeting will feature a briefing on the 
role of Government launch sites for future space operations, an 
activities report from FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation, 
and reports from the Committee's working groups. An agenda will be 
posted on the FAA Web site at http://ast.faa.gov/COMSTAC. Meetings of 
the COMSTAC Working Groups (Technology and Innovation, Reusable Launch 
Vehicle, Risk Management, and Launch Operations and Support) will be 
held on Tuesday, October 25, 2005. For specific information concerning 
the times and locations of the working group meetings, contact the 
contact person listed below.
    Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as 
sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should 
inform the contact person listed below in advance of the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda Parker (AST-100), Office of the 
Commercial Space Transportation, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 
331, Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-3674; e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cba9b9aea5afaae5bbaab9a0aeb98badaaaae5afa4bfe5aca4bd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0c6e7e6962686d227c6d7e67697e4c6a6d6d22686378226b637a">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Issued in Washington, DC, September 19, 2005.
Patricia Grace Smith,
Associate Administrator for Commercial, Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 05-19291 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
TROPIC LEISURE CORP., et al. v. HAILEY

106P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 8, 2017

L. Lamar Armstrong, Jr., Attorney at Law, Smithfield, Daniel K. Keeney, Attorney at Law, for Hailey, Jerry A.

*869R. Keith Shackleford, Attorney at Law, John Wait, Attorney, for Tropic Leisure Corp., et al.

John-Russell Bart Pate, Attorney at Law, for Virgin Islands Bar Association

The following order has been entered on the conditional motion filed on the 7th of April 2017 by Virgin Islands Bar Association for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of June 2017."
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 Innocap, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul Tidwell, Chief Executive Officer and 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 to my knowledge:  1. The Report fully complies with 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/ Paul Tidwell Paul Tidwell Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  June 27, 2011
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case No COMP/M.1859 — ENI / GALP)

(2004/C 180/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 29 June 2000, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

CELEX: subscriber information

http://publications.eu.int/general/en/eulaw_en.htm

----
1

The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota, adopting the reports and recommendations of the Honorable Arthur J.

Boylan, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1459

___________

Joseph Johnson, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Special Agent Josh Florell; *

Officer Steve Parshall; Officer Mark * [UNPUBLISHED]

Sletta; Officer Andy Stender; City of * 

Minneapolis; David Steinkamp, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: September 5, 2008

Filed: September 15, 2008

___________

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Joseph Johnson appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal and grant of summary

judgment in favor of defendants in this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v.

Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

Having carefully reviewed the record and considered Johnson’s arguments, we find
-2-

no basis for reversal. See Federer v. Gephardt, 363 F.3d 754, 757 (8th Cir. 2004) (de

novo standard of review for Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) dismissal); Anderson v. Larson,

327 F.3d 762, 767 (8th Cir. 2003) (de novo standard of review for grant of summary

judgment). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________