alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 23, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 70860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23201]



[[Page 70860]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel, Reproductive Health in 
Developing Countries P01 Review.
    Date: December 5, 2005.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Renaissance Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Connecticut Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20036.
    Contact Person: Carla T. Walls, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of 
Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Blvd., Room 
5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-6898, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e4938588889787a489858d88ca8a8d8cca838b92"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2057414c4c5343604d41494c0e4e49480e474f56">[email protected]</span></a>.


(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 8, 2005.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-23201 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
LIHIHX:I 1

Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 11-2 Filed 06/13/2007 Page 1 of 2
:07 FAX 02078986922 LIMIT ~OO2

CR O'Farrell

Syndicate 1036

Plantation Place

30 Fenchurch Street

London

EC3M 3BD

tel +44 (0)20 7105 4000

fax +44 (0)20 7105 4034

~

info@limit.co.uk

www.limft.co.uk

The Honourable John G. Koeltl

United States District Court

Southern District of New York

500 Pearl Street - Room 1030

New York, New York 10007-1312

RE: Deval DenizciIik Ve Ticaret A.S. v Repinter International Shipping Co. SA and

Miachart Corporation LLC

Docket07CV 3397

Dear Judge Koeltl

We refer to the letter of undertaking dd 22ndMay 2007 for US$1,187,769 put up by our

Underwriting Agents, Michael Else & Co, on our behalf, to secure the plaintiff's claim

and obtain the release of the funds attached pursuant to the above action.

We understand that an allegation has been made that the C.R. O'Farrell Syndicate

(Lloyd's Syndicate No. COF 1036) is in run-off. That assertion is completely false.

Weare a leading syndicate underwriting direct risks within the Lloyd's Insurance Market:

The syndicate was established 20 years ago in 1987 and has an underwriting capacity for

2007 of £220m. .

Syndicate 1036 forms part of Umbrella Syndicate 2999 which has a total capacity of

£780mfor2007.Thesyndicateis managedby LimitUnderwritingLimited,beingoneof

the largest agents at Lloyd's with £1.12bn of capacity under management. Limit is a

wholly owned subsidiary of QBE Insurance Group which provides 100% of the

syndicate's capacity.

Security provided by Lloyd's underwriters- such as that tendered in this action - is

accepted worldwide for the lifting of marine liens, arrests and attachments, and this

syndicate has secured severalRule B attachmentsin the past.

Yours sincerely

1ItfI/~

Myles A Sunley BSc (Hans) ACII

Chartered Insurer

Senior Claims Adjuster

~

QBE CR O'Farrell Syndicat. 1036 is managed by LimitUnderwriting Limited, a Lloyd's managing agent. Limit Underwriting Limited is

part of OSE European Operations, a division of the CaE Insurance Group and is authorised and rogulatod by tho Financial Services

Authority. Registered office as above. Registered In England and Wales No. 1035198 lET/F1036/PPISEP05

6/41074:43 PM

Eu,opeon

Opero"on,

Q}Q l:,

'I

,J

;

I

II i

I!

I',I

I!,'

i'~

I

"

i

i

!

I

II

Ii

II

\1

i~

'I:,i

'I

Ii

II

,

1<

1"1

:;'1

':1

,.,

""1

,i

i,

\\. \ 11

!!

!I

ill;

Ill

i

! .

Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 11-2 Filed 06/13/2007 Page 2 of 2
DOCSNY-271852v01 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

----------------------------------------------------------------X 

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER 

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LITIGATION 

: 

: 

: 

: 

21 MC 102 (AKH) 

----------------------------------------------------------------X 

VIVIANA VERGARA (AND HUSBAND, 

VERTER VERGARA), 

 Plaintiff, 

 - against - 

ALAN KASMAN DBA KASCO, et al.,

 Defendants. 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

06-CV-15116-AKH 

APPEARANCE 

ELECTRONICALLY FILED 

----------------------------------------------------------------X 

To the Clerk of this Court and all parties of record: 

Enter my appearance as counsel in this case for: 

MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC. 

I certify that I am admitted to practice in this court.

Dated: New York, New York 

 October 3, 2007 

 By:

DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP 

 /s/ Judith R. Cohen___ 

Judith R. Cohen (JC-8614) 

1177 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, New York 10036 

Phone: (212) 277-6500 

Fax: (212) 277-6501 

Attorney for Defendant 

MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC. 

Case 1:06-cv-15116-AKH Document 10 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cr-00365-AKH Document 17 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 1 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00365-AKH Document 17 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 2 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00365-AKH Document 17 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 3 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00365-AKH Document 17 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 4 of 5Case 1:07-cr-00365-AKH Document 17 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 5 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03417-DAB-DCF Document 12-3 Filed 07/25/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03417-DAB-DCF Document 12-3 Filed 07/25/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03417-DAB-DCF Document 12-3 Filed 07/25/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03417-DAB-DCF Document 12-3 Filed 07/25/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03417-DAB-DCF Document 12-3 Filed 07/25/2007 Page 5 of 5
Case 1:07-cr-00368-RWS Document 14 Filed 05/05/2008 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cr-00368-RWS Document 14 Filed 05/05/2008 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cr-00368-RWS Document 14 Filed 05/05/2008 Page 3 of 3
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D20 23

- 0244

_____________________________
M ARVIN P ACE , Appellant,

v.

R ICKY D. D IXON , Secretary, F l orida De partment of Corrections
, Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. J. Lee Marsh , Judge

.

June 14, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
B.L. T HOMAS , B ILBREY , and T ANENBAUM , JJ.
, concur

.

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

.

_____________________________2 Marvin Pace , pro se , Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Brian R. Flynn

- Fallon , Assistant Attorney General, and Kelly R. Forren , A ssistant Attorney General
, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
#### STATE v. JIMMY HICKS.

(Filed 29 March, 1967.)

1. Criminal Law § 5—

Every man is presumed sane, and the burden is upon defendant to prove his defense of mental irresponsibility, which burden of proof is not satisfied by a contention that if defendant were normal he would not have attempted the escape for which he was prosecuted.

2. Criminal Law § 25—

The fact that the court pronounces judgment after defendant’s plea of *nolo contendere*constitutes an acceptance of the plea, and no formal record of the acceptance is required.

Appeal by defendant from *Martin, S.J.,*at January 1967 Term of Watauga Superior Court.

While serving sentences for two felonies the defendant was charged with escape. He waived the appointment of counsel and signed the required waiver. He then entered a plea of *nolo conten-dere*and was sentenced to serve an additional 12 months. He appealed, and counsel was appointed to represent him. His only exception is to the judgment.

*763
      *Attorney General T. Wade Bruton, Staff Attorney Theodore C. Brown, Jr., for the State.*

*John H. Bingham for defendant appellant.*

Pee CuRiam.

At his trial the defendant interposed no defense, but now claims his mental disability is shown by his escape — that if he were normal mentally he would have known better. The plea is novel and interesting, and has many implications and possibilities.

Unfortunately for the defendant, however, that is not the law. “Every man is presumed to be sane and to possess a sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crimes until the contrary is proven.” *S. v. Cureton,*218 N.C. 491, 11 S.E. 2d 469. And the burden is on the defendant to prove his irresponsibility. *S. v. Creech,*229 N.C. 662, 61 S.E. 2d 348.

The defendant also contends that the sentence is invalid because the record does not show that his plea of *nolo contendere*was accepted by the court. He quotes from *S. v. Thomas,*236 N.C. 196, 72 S.E. 2d 525, “The plea of *nolo contendere*cannot be entered by a defendant as a matter of right, but is pleadable only by leave of the court and its acceptance by the court is entirely a matter of grace.” The same case quotes other authorities and says: “A plea of *nolo contendere*is equivalent to a plea of guilty insofar as it gives the court power to punish.” In *S. v. McIntyre,*238 N.C. 305, 77 S.E. 2d 698, which cites and approves the *Thomas*case, the trial court did not accept the defendant’s plea, but proceeded to hear evidence and to pass upon the question of his guilt or innocence. The court said that “the defendant’s plea of *nolo contendere*constitutes a formal declaration on his part that he did not contend with the State in respect to the charge and was tantamount to a plea of guilty * **** The presiding Judge acquired full power to pronounce judgment against the defendant for the crime charged in the indictment * * * when he allowed the Solicitor to accept the plea tendered by the defendant.”

The very fact that the Judge pronounced a judgment after the plea of *nolo contendere*is entered constitutes acceptance of the plea, and no formal record thereof is required.

No error.
# C_2007184EN.01000101.xml

| 7.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 184/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4736 — Altor Fund II/Wrist Group)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 184/01)

On 31 July 2007, 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 (EC) No 139/2004. 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:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4736. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4736. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
#### STATE v. PARTIN

No. 11 PC

Case below: 48 N.C. App. 274

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31-denied 4 November 1980. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 4 November 1980.
Case 1:07-cv-03238-AKH Document 4 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 1 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 2 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 3 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 4 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 5 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 6 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 7 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 8 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 9 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 10 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 11 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 12 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 13 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 14 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 15 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 16 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 17 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 18 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 19 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 20 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 21 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 22 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 23 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 24 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 25 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 26 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 27 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 28 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 29 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 30 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 31 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 32 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 33 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 34 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 35 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 36 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 37 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 38 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 39 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 40 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 41 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 42 of 43
Case 7:07-cv-03305-KMK-LMS Document 11-2 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 43 of 43
#### STATE v. FURR

No. 24 PC.

Case below: 52 N.C. App. 735.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 October 1981.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED 

PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of Biomet, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-118326, 333-118323, 333-118264, 333-65139,333-00331, 33-75618, 33-65700, 33-50268, 33-37561, 33-26826 and 33-7361), on Form S-4 (File No. 333-88905) and on Forms S-3 (File Nos. 33-50420, 33-27008 and 333-94959) and in the related prospectus, of our reports dated July 28, 2006,with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Biomet, Inc., Biomet, Inc., management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting of Biomet, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended May 31, 2006. 

/s/Ernst & Young LLP 

Fort Wayne, Indiana 

August 8, 2006
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 1 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 2 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 3 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 4 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 5 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 6 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 7 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 8 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 9 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 10 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 11 of 12
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 3 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 12 of 12
#### GRIFFIN v. WHEELER-LEONARD & CO.

No. 34 PC.

Case below: 22 N.C. App. 323.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 30 August 1974.
EXHIBIT 32



KREISLER MANUFACTURING CORPORATION



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), I, Edward L. Stern, the
undersigned officer of Kreisler Manufacturing Corporation (the Registrant), with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Registrant on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 (the Report) hereby certify that to my
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 Registrant.



|                                                            |  |  |  |                   
|----------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------
|/s/ Edward L. Stern                                         |  |  |  | Date: May 13, 2004
|Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer |  |  |  |                   



The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Case 1:07-cv-03419-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03419-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32(b)Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350I, Mark J. Plush, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Keithley Instruments, Inc.(the “Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:(1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2007which this certification accompanies 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, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /s/ Mark J. Plush Mark J. Plush  August 9, 2007  A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Keithley Instruments, Inc. andwill be retained by Keithley Instruments, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.
#### LEGGETT v. R. R. Co.

No. 51 PC.

Case below: 10 N.C. App. 681.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 12 May 1971.
#### STATE v. BURDEN

No. 146 PC.

Case below: 36 N.C. App. 332.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 14 July 1978.
#### DELP v. DELP

No. 293 PC.

Case below: 53 N.C. App. 72.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 October 1981.
#### STATE v. BALDWIN

No. 25 PC.

Case below: 26 N.C. App. 359.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 2 September 1975.
#### STATE v. COOPER

No. 337 PC.

No. 134 (Fall Term).

Case below: 52 N.C. App. 349.

Petition by Attorney General for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 6 October 1981.
NUMBER 13-14-00508-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

DAVID VASQUEZ, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 117th District Court 

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

O R D E R 

Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

This cause is before the Court on appellant’s motion to remand to trial court for 

new trial, the State’s response and motion to abate appeal, and appellant’s motion for 

extension of time to file the brief. The reporter’s record consisting of four volumes was 

filed with this Court on October 28, 2014. The reporter has notified this Court that volume 

5, consisting of the exhibits, cannot be filed because the exhibits are not in her possession 
2

and cannot be located. Appellant states the lost exhibits were original exhibits and 

cannot be replaced by agreement. The State has responded that it may be possible to 

obtain duplicate exhibits, or the exhibits may be located. 

Because of the unknown status of the exhibits, we GRANT the State’s motion to 

abate and remand. Appellant’s motion for new trial is CARRIED WITH THE CASE. 

This appeal is ABATED and the matter is REMANDED to the trial court. In accordance 

with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(f)(4), the trial court is directed to conduct a 

hearing to determine: (1) if the appellant has timely requested a reporter's record; (2) if, 

without the appellant's fault, a significant exhibit or a significant portion of the court 

reporter's notes and records has been lost or destroyed or - if the proceedings were 

electronically recorded - a significant portion of the recording has been lost or destroyed 

or is inaudible; (3) if the lost, destroyed, or inaudible portion of the reporter's record, or 

the lost and destroyed exhibit, is necessary to the appeal's resolution; and (4) if the lost, 

destroyed, or inaudible portion of the reporter's record cannot be replaced by agreement 

of the parties, or the lost or destroyed exhibit cannot be replaced either by agreement of 

the parties or with a copy determined by the trial court to accurately duplicate with 

reasonable certainty the original exhibit. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(f).

The trial court is directed to forward the record of the proceedings, including any 

orders and findings, to this Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this order, or to 

notify this Court within such period indicating a date by which the trial court can comply. 

Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file the brief is GRANTED pending 

resolution of the matter herein.

It is so ordered.
3

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

19th day of December, 2014.