alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 03-15-00348-CV

______________________________________

COURT OF APPEALS THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

______________________________________

TODD ENRIGHT Appellant , v. ASCLEPIUS PANACEA, LLC; ASCLEPIUS PANACEA GP, LLC; DAILY PHARMACY, LLC; DAILY PHARMACY GP, LLC; AND TOTH ENTERPRISES II, P .A. D/B/A VICTORY MEDICAL CENTER, Appellees

.

______________________________________ ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF ADDITIONAL COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT TODD ENRIGHT

______________________________________ On Appeal from the 98th Judicial District Court

of Travis County, Texas Trial Court No. D-1-GN-14-004689 Hon. Gisela D. Triana of the 200th Judicial District Court, Presiding

__________________________________
TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: Michael A. Heidler of Vinson & Elkins LLP hereby enters his appearance as additional counsel of record for Appellant Todd Enright. The information required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.2 is as follows: ACCEPTED 03-15-00348-CV 7436727 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 10/19/2015 2:52:32 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK2 Michael A. Heidler State Bar No. 24059921 V INSON & ELKINS LLP 2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 100 Austin, Texas 78746-7568 Tel 512.542.8579 Fax 512.542.8612 mheidler@velaw.com Jennifer B. Poppe of Vinson & Elkins LLP will remain lead counsel for Appellant Todd Enright.
Respectfully submitted,
V INSON & E LKINS LLP
/s/ Michael A. Heidler Jennifer B. Poppe State Bar No. 24007855 Michael A. Heidler State Bar No. 24059921 Jonah Jackson State Bar No. 24071450 2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 100 Austin, Texas 78746 Telephone: (512) 542-8400 Facsimile: (512) 542-8612 jpoppe@velaw.com mheidler@velaw.com jjackson@velaw.com Attorneys for Appellant Todd Enright3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that on the 19th day of October 2015, a true and correct copy of this notice was served on the following attorneys in accordance with the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure via electronic filing or email. Eric J. Taube Paul Matula Rola Daaboul Taube Summers Harrison Taylor Meinzer Brown LLP 100 Congress Avenue, 18th Floor Austin, Texas 78701 etaube@taubesummers.com pmatula@taubesummers.com rdaaboul@taubesummers.com

/s/ Michael A. Heidler Michael A. Heidler
Exhibit 10.5(a)
  
  Re: Management Agreement Renewals
   
    
    Bristol Energy Fund LP
    
    CMF SandRidge Master Fund L.P.
    
    Bohdan Mysko
    
    CMF SandRidge Feeder (Cayman) Ltd.
    
    UDC International
    
    Energy Advisors Portfolio L.P.
    
    Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P.
    
    Tactical Diversified Futures fund L.P.
    
    Diversified Multi-Advisor Futures Fund L.P.
    
    Diversified Multi-Advisor Futures Fund L.P. II
   CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLCBy:
    /s/ Jennifer MagroJennifer MagroChief Financial Officer and DirectorBy:
    /s/ Andrew M. RowePrint Name:  Andrew M. Rowe
#### Stephen Doyle v. Annie Kuchar.

1. New *Trials—Absence of*Witnesses.—An affidavit stating in effect that a witness, suspecting himself in danger of being prosecuted for bastardy, went away to avoid arrest, is insufficient to entitle the affiant to a new trial.

Memorandum.—Bastardy proceedings. Appeal from the Criminal Coma of Cook Comity; the Hon. James Goggie, Judge, presiding.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed January 28, 1895.

John Heron, attorney for appellant.

Flieiimann *&*Halik, attorneys for appellee.

*376Mb. Presiding Justice Waterman

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This was a proceeding under the statute concerning bastardy. The jury having found appellant to be the father, etc., he moved for a new trial, and in support of such motion filed an affidavit setting forth that one Clark, for whom before trial he (affiant) had made earnest and ineffectual search, was, as he has since learned, at Hot Springs, Arkansas, whither, to the best of appellant’s belief, said .Clark went for the purpose of evading arrest as the father of the child of Annie linchar. This affidavit is in effect that affiant believes that said Clark, suspecting himself, went away to avoid arrest.

The evidence, if produced, would not be admissible, and if admissible, by no means conclusive, and not such as entitled appellant to a new trial. The judgment of the Criminal Court is affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-50346 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus HERIBERTO VERGARA-ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-01-CR-1372-ALL-DB

-------------------- October 30, 2002 Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Heriberto Vergara-Estrada appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that the sentence is invalid because it exceeds the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Vergara-Estrada complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based on his prior removal following an aggravated felony conviction. He argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional.No. 02-50346 -2- Alternatively, Vergara-Estrada contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) define separate offenses. He argues that the aggravated felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence was an element of the offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) that should have been alleged in his indictment.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Vergara-Estrada acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
Case 1:07-cv-03479-AKH Document 2 Filed 05/11/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 12 Filed 10/18/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 12 Filed 10/18/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03467-JFK Document 7 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03467-JFK Document 7 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 2 of 2
| By/s/David L. Cheek                                                                                          David L. CheekPresident and Chief Executive OfficerAugust 7, 2009 | By/s/  Bert E. Downing, Jr.                                                                                 Bert E. Downing, Jr.Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,Corporate Controller and TreasurerAugust 7, 2009 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 23

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-38030) pertaining to the 1998 Stock Plan and 1999 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan of NetRatings, Inc. of our report dated January 18, 2002,
with respect to the financial statements of NetRatings, Inc. included in the
Annual report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2001.

                                          /s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Palo Alto, California
March 28, 2002

                                      1
EXHIBIT 21
 SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
(as of November 19, 2008)
 Jurisdiction of Incorporation
    
    PercentSubsidiaries of the Registrant
    
    or Organization
    
    Ownership*American Azide Corporation
    
    Nevada
    
    
    100
    %American Pacific Corporation
    
    Nevada
    
    
    100
    %Ampac Farms, Inc.
    
    Nevada
    
    
    100
    %Ampac-ISP
Corp.
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %Energetic Additives Inc., LLC
    
    Nevada
    
    
    100
    %Ampac-ISP UK Westcott Limited
    
    England & Wales
    
    
    100
    %Ampac Fine Chemicals LLC
    
    California
    
    
    100
    %Marotta Holdings Limited**
    
    Ireland
    
    
    100
    %Marotta Ireland Limited**
    
    Ireland
    
    
    100
    %Ampac ISP UK Cheltenham Limited
    
    England & Wales
    
    
    100
    %
 
 *
    
    Ownership is either direct or indirect depending on the specific entity**
    
    Name changes are anticipated for these newly acquired entities
Case 1:06-cv-15118-AKH Document 20 Filed 10/12/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### In re GLOBE FOOD EQUIPMENT CO.

No. 04-1611.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

DECIDED: March 8, 2005.

ORDER

The parties having so agreed, it is

ORDERED that the proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R.App. P. 42(b).
#### STATE v. FLEMING

No. 171 PC.

Case below: 33 N.C. App. 216.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 14 July 1977. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 14 July 1977.
.-..., -: < 

. ,, . "'.'- 8: ........... -:A':., ......... i: ,, ij.. . . 

'i . ,,,. '!'.\ ;:; C,.~ :. , 

. I,,:, ; . . : t 

. !i ,..... :! .. , . 

, . z: ">,. ..I , . i c ,,I'i : .. . . , *. . . . : . <......I. . ...... :': f,: , , . . ., . ' ,.. ,. :I . . . * >

\; 

/. _.. . ......... ... ......... UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT i ....... . .- :I ...... 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - 

. . ..: , . . .A :'.: ?:-I.? ...--.- :,& ,. .. ....... ..--. ~. . ....... .... ---. ......... 7 I:' 

..... 

............................................................... X 

IN RE: Fosamax Products Liability : 

Litigation 1: 06-md-1789 (JFK) 

Order ............................................................... X 

This Document Relates to: All Actions : 

JOHN F. KEENAN, United States District Judge: 

This order amends the Court's Memorandum Opinion and 

Order dated September 12, 2007. The parties' briefs on the 

sharing of costs related to document production shall be 

submitted by October 9, 2007. 

SO ORDERED. 

Dated: New ~ork, New York 

September 17, 2007 

JOHN F. KEENAN 

United States District Judge 

Case 1:07-cv-03466-JFK Document 10 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. RIMMER

No. 160 PC.

Case below: 25 N.C. App. 637.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 25 August 1975.
#### STATE v. DAVIS

No. 23.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 84.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 30 January 1973. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 30 January 1973.
Case 1:07-cv-03273-RJH Document 19 Filed 04/15/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03273-RJH Document 19 Filed 04/15/2008 Page 2 of 2
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-09-00381-CR

IN RE CHEYENNE PATE

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Cheyenne Pate seeks a writ of mandamus compelling Respondent, the 

Honorable Patrick H. Simmons of the 77th District Court of Limestone County, to 

appoint counsel and reconsider his motion for DNA testing.1

Mandamus relief may be granted if the relator can demonstrate that (1) the act 

sought to be compelled is purely ministerial and (2) the relator has no other adequate 

legal remedy. In re Ludwig, 162 S.W.3d 454, 454 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, orig. 

proceeding) (citing Neveu v. Culver, 105 S.W.3d 641, 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003)).

 

1 Pate’s application is defective because: (1) his certification does not comply with Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 52.3(j); (2) his proof of service does not comply with Rule of Appellate Procedure 

9.5; and (3) he failed to include the required record pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure 52.3 and 

52.7. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5; see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7. Nevertheless, we will 

apply Rule of Appellate Procedure 2 and disregard these deficiencies. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2. 
In re Pate Page 2

A “convicting court is required to appoint counsel only if it determines that the 

convicted person is indigent and finds reasonable grounds for a motion to be filed.” 

Ludwig, 162 S.W.3d at 454-55 (citing TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 64.01(c) (Vernon 

Supp. 2009)). “[E]ven if the convicting court determines that a convicted person is 

indigent, the court would not be required to appoint counsel if it found there were no 

reasonable grounds for the motion to be filed--a finding we would review for an abuse 

of discretion.” Id. at 455. Appointment of counsel is not a purely ministerial act. See id. 

Thus, Pate cannot satisfy the first requirement for mandamus relief. Id.; see In re Scott, 

No. 06-08-00096-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 7075, at *2-5 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Sept. 24, 

2008, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). We, therefore, deny Pate’s petition for writ of 

mandamus.

FELIPE REYNA

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis 

Writ denied

Opinion delivered and filed December 30, 2009

[OT06]
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DARRYL ANTONIO MACK,

Appellant,

v.

JENNIFER HOFFMAN,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-2732

[June 7, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County; Francis Viamontes, Judge; L.T. Case No. FMCE21-

011414.

Jason R. Marks of Kluger, Kaplan, Silverman, Katzen & Levine, P.L.,

Miami, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. In re Adoption of Gaskins, 318 So. 2d 165, 165 (Fla. 4th DCA 

1975) (“It is impossible for this court to determine whether the trial court 

abused its discretion because of the absence of a transcript of testimony 

upon which the trial court findings were based.”). 

LEVINE, FORST and ARTAU JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Fremont and Winema Resource Advisory Committee will meet in Klamath Falls, Oregon, for the purpose of conducting business as it relates to the planning of RAC Project Proposal workshops in the winter of 2006. The RAC will also discuss budget and other outstanding business. The RAC is authorized under the provisions of Title II of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on December 14, 2005.

# ADDRESSES:

                        The meeting will be held at the Klamath Ranger District Office located at 1936 California Avenue, Klamath Falls, Oregon 97603. Send written comments to Fremont and                               ( print page 71081)                            Winema Resource Advisory Committee, c/o USDA Forest Service, P.O. Box 67, Paisley, OR 97636, or electronically to                         *agowan@fs.fed.us.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Amy Gowan, Designated Federal Official, c/o Klamath National Forest, 1312 Fairlane Road, Yreka, CA 96097, telephone (530) 841-4421.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The agenda will include time for RAC proposal workshop planning, funding review and 2002 to 2005 project status report. 1 All Fremont and Winema Resource Advisory Committee Meetings are open to the public. There will be a time for public input and comment. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend.

Dated: November 16, 2005.

Amy A. Gowan,

Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 05-23261 Filed 11-23-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
CONSENT OF EXPERT





Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F (the 40-F) of Platinum Group Metals Ltd. (the Company) for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2009 to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Annual Information Form (the AIF) and Managements Discussion and Analysis(MD&A) of the Company for the year then ended, which are incorporated by reference therein.



Each of the undersigned hereby consents to the references to, and the information derived from, the report titled Technical Report (Updated Feasibility Study) Western Bushveld Joint Venture Project 1 (Elandsfontein and Frischgewaagd) dated October 8, 2009, Revised Technical Report (Feasibility Study)
Western Bushveld Joint Venture Project 1 (Elandsfontein and Frischgewaagd) dated June 10, 2009 and Technical Report (Feasibility Study) Western Bushveld Joint Venture Project 1 (Elandsfontein And Frischgewaagd) dated July 7, 2008 and to the references, as applicable, to the undersigneds name in the 40-F, the AIF and the MD&A.







|                                                                                                                             | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Turnberry Projects (Pty) Ltd.

Name: Gordon Cunningham
Title: Principal Engineer & Managing Director
Date: November 26, 2009 | 
|//signed//
Gordon I. Cunningham
Date: November 26, 2009                                                                      | 
|//signed//
Timothy V. Spindler
Date: November 26, 2009                                                                       |
Resignation of Sky Kelley



 Exhibit 10.01 
 Resignation of Sky Kelley 
 August 14, 2009 
 Board of Directors 
 Croff Enterprises, Inc. 
 345 N. Maple Drive, Suite 208 
 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 
 Effective immediately, please consider this letter my resignation as President, Chief Executive Officer and director of Croff Enterprises, Inc. (“Croff”). My
resignation was not the result of a disagreement with the Company or any matter relating to the Company’s operations, policies, or practices. 
 As you
know, I will continue to serve in my positions as President and Chief Executive Officer of Croff’s subsidiary, America’s Minority Health Network, Inc. No longer being responsible for the corporate requirements of a publicly traded company
allows me to look forward to concentrating my efforts to focus on securing advertisers to help build a successful and profitable network subsidiary for Croff. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	 /s/ Sky Kelley

	Sky Kelley

  

 7
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, As AdoptedPursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

**In connection with the Quarterly Report of WhitneyInformation Network, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year endedDecember 31, 2001 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald S. Simon, the Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:**

 

(1)                                  theReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

Dated:  June 2, 2004

 

 
|   | /s/Ronald S.  Simon             |   |
|--------|---------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name: Ronald  S. Simon          |
|   | Title: Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
Case 1:07-cv-03385-BSJ-KNF Document 6-15 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03385-BSJ-KNF Document 6-15 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03385-BSJ-KNF Document 6-15 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 3 of 3
##### 



PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
 
   Base Salary
  Annual Incentive Award
  FY08 Stipend




---



##### 



FY09 Guaranteed Bonus Award
  Long-Term Incentive Plan
 nd rd
 Make whole provisions
  Employee Benefits
   2
             3




---



##### 



Executive Benefits
   4
         Professional Requirements
  or and
   5




---



##### 



Business Information and Non-Competition
    Acceptance of Employment
    
    
    Employment and Education History Form
    
    Code of Business Conduct: Acknowledgment Form
    
    Code of Business Conduct and Ethics: Acknowledgment Form
    
    Non-Harassment/Non-Discrimination Policy: Acknowledgment Form
    
    Policy Statement Prohibiting ...: Acknowledgment Form
  6




---



##### 




    
    Insider Trading Policy: Acknowledgment Form
    
    Agreement To Protect Confidential Information
    
    Personnel Information Form: (Section A)
    
    I-9 Form
    
    W-4 Form
    
    Employee Authorization for Automatic Deposits Form
    
    Business Travel and Expense Reporting: Acknowledgment Form
   
  /s/ Ana DutraAna Dutra
    
    Date
  7