alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00241

- CV

BLAKENERGY, LTD., A TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP APPELLANT

V.

ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIV ERY COMPANY, LLC APPELLEE

----------

FROM THE 97TH DISTRI CT COURT OF CLAY COU NTY TRIA L COURT NO. 2012

- 0033C

- CV

----------


### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

----------
Blakenergy, Ltd., a Texas Limited Partnership, has filed a petition for

permissive appeal asking this court to review interlocutory orders of the trial court

regarding Blakenergy’s expert witness Steve D. Goolsby and the related denial s
of Blakenergy’s motion for continuance and motion to reconsider. We have

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 considered the petition, response, and reply

. Given the requirement that we

construe section 51.014 strictly

, 2 we de cline to enterta in this appeal, and we

hereby dismiss it. 3

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DELIVERED: September 25, 2014

2 See Rogers v. Orr , 408 S.W.3d 640, 642 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 2013, pet. denied) (“We strictly co nstrue a statute authorizing an interlocutory appeal because it is an exception to the general rule that only final judgments are appealable.”).

3 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(d)

– (f) (West Supp. 2014) ; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 481-482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-39]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-30,378, etc.]

Texaco Exploration and Production, Inc., Tulsa, OK; Amended 
Certification Regarding Elgibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance

    In the Matter of Texaco Exploration and Production, Incorporated 
Operating at Various Locations in the Following States:

TA-W-30,378A  Alabama
TA-W-30,378C  Colorado
TA-W-30,378E  Illinois
TA-W-30,378G  Mississippi
TA-W-30,378I  North Dakota
TA-W-30,378K  Texas
TA-W-30,378M  Wyoming
TA-W-30,378B  California
TA-W-30,378D  Idaho [[Page 482]] 
TA-W-30,378F  Louisiana
TA-W-30,378H  New Mexico
TA-W-30,378J  Oklahoma
TA-W-30,378L  Washington
TA-W-30,378N  Montana

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 USC 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Water Adjustment Assistance on December 2, 1994, applicable 
to all workers of the subject firm. The certification notice will soon 
be published in the Federal Register.
    At the request of the company, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. New findings show that 
worker separations occurred in the state of Montana.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Texaco Exploration and Production, Incorporated, who were 
affected by increased imports.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-30,378 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Texaco Exploration and Production, Inc., 
located in Tulsa, Oklahoma and at all locations in the following 
states listed below engaged in the exploration and production of 
crude oil, natural gas liquids and natural gas who became totally or 
partially separated from employment on or after October 3, 1993 are 
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the 
Trade Act of 1974.''

TA-W-30,378A  Alabama
TA-W-30,378C  Colorado
TA-W-30,378E  Illinois
TA-W-30,378G  Mississippi
TA-W-30,378I  North Dakota
TA-W-30,378K  Texas
TA-W-30,378M  Wyoming
TA-W-30,378B  California
TA-W-30,378D  Idaho
TA-W-30,378F  Louisiana
TA-W-30,378H  New Mexico
TA-W-30,378J  Oklahoma
TA-W-30,378L  Washington
TA-W-30,378N  Montana

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of December, 1994.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-39 Filed 1-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9049-9050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3946]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION

[Ex Parte No. 388 (Sub-No. 16)]


Intrastate Rail Rate Authority--Mississippi

AGENCY: Interstate Commerce Commission.

ACTION: Notice of provisional recertification.

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

SUMMARY: The State of Mississippi has filed an application for 
recertification. The Commission, under State Intrastate Rail Rate 
Authority, 5 I.C.C.2d 680, 685 (1989), provisionally recertifies the 
State of Mississippi to regulate intra-state rail rates, 
classifications, rules, and practices. After its review, the Commission 
will issue a recertification decision or take other appropriate action.

[[Page 9050]] DATES: This provisional recertification will be effective 
on February 16, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine Sehrt-Green (202) 927-5269 or 
Beryl Gordon (202) 927-5610 [TDD for hearing impaired: (202) 927-5721].

    Decided: February 10, 1995.

    By the Commission, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-3946 Filed 2-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7035-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 37 (Friday, February 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 10396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4634]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service


Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    Each Friday the Public Health Service (PHS) publishes a list of 
information collection requests under review, in compliance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of 
these requests, call the PHS Reports Clearance Office on 202-690-7100.
    The following requests have been submitted for review since the 
list was last published on Friday, February 10.

1. Healthy Start Evaluation

    Survey of Postpartum Women--New--As part of the national evaluation 
of the Healthy Start demonstration program, a survey will be conducted 
of postpartum women who have received services under Healthy Start and 
a comparison group from the same area. Data will be collected on risk 
factors, services received, and related topics. Respondents: 
Individuals or households; Number of Respondents: 4,500; Number of 
Response per Respondent: 1; Average Burden per Response .58 hour; 
Estimated Annual Burden: 2,625 hours. Send comments to Shannah Koss, 
Human Resources and Housing Branch, New Executive Office Building, Room 
10235, Washington, D.C. 20503.

2. 1995 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse Pilot Test

    New--The pilot test sample will consist of 300 persons living in 
two Primary Sampling Units. The data collection is necessary to 
determine how two proposed question modules for the 1996 NHSDA, on HIV/
AIDS risk behaviors and drug-related driving behaviors, will affect 
core NHSDA data and response rates. In addition, the appropriateness of 
new question content, wording, and format will be evaluated 
quantitatively and qualitatively. Respondents: Individuals or 
Households; Number of Respondents: 1,002; Number of Responses per 
Respondent: 1; Average Burden per Response: 0.431 hour; Estimated 
Annual Burden: 432 hours. Send comments to Shannah Koss, Human 
Resources and Housing Branch, New Executive Office Building, Room 
10235, Washington, D.C. 20503.
    Written comments and recommendations concerning the proposed 
information collections should be sent within 30 days of this notice 
directly to the individuals designated.

    Dated: February 21, 1995.
James Scanlon,
Director, Data Policy Staff, Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Health and PHS Reports Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-4634 Filed 2-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-17-M
#### STATE v. WOODROW GOODING and LeROY WILLIAMSON.

(Filed 4 November, 1959.)

1. Assault and Battery § 17—

In a prosecution upon a warrant charging assault with a deadly weapon the jury may return a verdict of guilty of a simple assault when warranted by the evidence. G:S. 15-170.

2. Criminal Law § 108—

Defendants’ contentions that the judge failed to give equal stress to their contentions as compared with those of the State *helé*to be without substance, the charge of the court complying with the provisions of G.S. 1-180.

Higgins, J., not sitting.

Appeal by defendants from *Mallard, J.,*Special Criminal Term, 4 May 1959, of VaNce.

Criminal prosecution on a warrant charging defendant Gooding on 9 February 1959 with ¡a criminal assault with a deadly weapon, to wit: a shotgun, on Walter Frank Norwood. A similar warrant charges defendant Williamson on the same date with a similar assault on Walter Frank Norwood, with the exception that the deadly weapon is alleged in the warrant to he a pistol.

Each defendant appealed to the Superior Court of Nance County from judgments against them in the Recorder’s Court of Vance County.

In the Superior Court thé two cases were consolidated for trial by the judge without objection.- In the Superior Court both defen*176dants pleaded not guilty, and were tried anew and *de novo*by a judge and jury. G.S. 15-177.1.

Jury verdict as .to each defendant: Guilty of a simple assault as charged in the warrant.

From separate judgments of 30 days imprisonment as to each defendant, each defendant appeals to the Supreme Court.

*Malcolm B. Seawell, Attorney General, and T. W. Bruton, Assistant Attorney General for the State.*

*W. M. Nicholson, James B. Ledford, James J. Bandleman and L. Glen Ledford for defendants, appellants.*

Per CuRiAM.

Each warrant charges a criminal assauLt with a deadly weapon, specifying the weapon. The jury convicted each defendant of a simple assault, a less degree of the same crime. The evidence warranted such verdicts,, and the jury was empowered by virtue of the provisions of G.S. 15-170 to return such verdicts on warrants charging assault with a deadly weapon, *S. v. Anderson,*230 N.C. 54, 51 S. E. 2d 895.

Defendants have one assignment of error, that the court in charging the jury failed to give equal stress to the contentions of the defendants as compared to those of the State. A study of the charge does not support this criticism. *S. v. Morgan,*245 N.C. 215, 95 S.E. 2d 507. The assignment of error is overruled. The court in its charge complied with the provisions of G.S. 1-180.

• In the trial below we find no error.

HiggiNS, J., not sitting.
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
    Date: August 6, 2010
    By:
    /s/ JAMES A. WILHELMName:
    James A. WilhelmTitle:
    Director, President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)Date: August 6, 2010
    By:
    /s/ G. MARC BAUMANNName:
    G. Marc BaumannTitle:
    Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

(Principal Financial Officer)Date: August 6, 2010
    By:
    /s/ DANIEL R. MEYERName:
    Daniel R. MeyerTitle:
    Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Assistant Treasurer

(Principal Accounting Officer and Duly Authorized Officer)
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 22

- 0850

_____________________________
R OBERT F. P OOLE , Appellant,

v.

R ICKY D. D IXON , Secretary, Florida Department o f Corrections, e t a l

. , Appellee s

.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. J. Layne Smith , Judge

. September 19, 2022

P ER C URIAM

.
D ISMISSED

. R AY , M AKAR , and N ORDBY , JJ., concur

.

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

.

_____________________________2 Robert F. Poole, pro se
, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kelly R. Forren, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee Ricky D. Dixon, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections; Marie A. Borland, Ethen R. Shapiro, and David W. Hughes of Hill, Ward & Henderson, P.A. , Tampa, for Appellee Centurion of Florida, LLC

.
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11

- 7481

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,

Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. ABDALLAH HUSSEIN FAKIH, a/k/a Abdullah Fakih ,

Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville

. Richard L. Voorhees , District Judge. ( 5:08

- cr - 00021

- RLV

- DCK

- 4; 5:11

- cv 00087

- RLV )

Submitted : April 19, 2012 Decided: April 24, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Abdallah Hussein Fakih, Appellant Pro Se. C. Nicks Williams, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinio ns are not binding precedent in this circuit.2

PER CURIAM:

Abdallah Hussein Fakih seeks to appeal the district

court’s order s denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West
Supp. 2011 ) motion and treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion

as a successive § 2255 motion, and denying it on that basis.
The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th
Cir. 2004). A certificate of app ealability will not issue
absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court
denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard
by demonstrating that reasonable juri sts would find that the

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is
debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003).

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the
prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural
ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable
claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S.

at 484

- 85.
We have independently reviewed th e record and conclude

that Fakih has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We3

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materi als before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional pr ocess.

DISMISSED
Slip Op. 18 - 145

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

 

:

DIAMOND SAWBLADES :

MANUFACTURERS’ COALITION, :

:

 Plaintiff, : 

:

 v. : Before: R. Kenton Musgrave, Senior Judge

: 

UNITED STATES, : Consol. Court No. 15-00164

: 

 Defendant, : 

:

 and :

:

BEIJING GANG YAN DIAMOND :

PRODUCTS COMPANY, GANG YAN :

DIAMOND PRODUCTS, INC., CLIFF :

INTERNATIONAL LTD., HUSQVARNA :

CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS NORTH :

AMERICA, INC., HEBEI HUSQVARNA-JIKAI :

DIAMOND TOOLS CO., LTD., WEIHAI :

XIANGGUANG MECHANICAL INDUSTRIAL :

CO., LTD., BOSUN TOOLS CO., LTD., and :

BOSUN TOOLS INC., :

:

 Defendant-Intervenors. :

 :

JUDGMENT

This case having been instituted to challenge certain administrative review

determinations of the International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce

(“Commerce”) published sub nom. Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People’s

Republic of China, 80 Fed. Reg. 32344 (June 8, 2015) (final antidumping duty administrative review

of 2012-13 period) (“Final Results”), as explained by its accompanying issues and decision
Court No. 15-00164 Page 2

memorandum, Public Record Document (“PDoc”) 354 (June 2, 2015) (“IDM”); and, after a previous

remand, the case having been remanded a second time per Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’

Coalition v. United States, Slip Op. 18-26, 42 CIT ___, 299 F. Supp. 3d 1374 (Mar. 22, 2018), ECF

No. 100; and the final administrative results of the second remand redetermination pursuant thereto

having been filed (July 20, 2018), ECF No. 106; wherein Commerce explains that it (1) re-examined

and adjusted its build-up methodology for diamond sawblade cores produced by respondent Weihai

Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd. with respect to the steel involved in their production,

and (2) re-examined the audited 2013 financial statements of K.M. & A.A. Co., Ltd. and determined

to use it in addition to Thai Gulf’s 2013 financial statements in the calculation of the surrogate

financial ratios; and a scheduling order providing for comments on the final second remand

redetermination and the filing of supporting documents for such comments to proceed through

October 3, 2018, having been entered on the docket, ECF 108 (July 31, 2018); and the administrative

record having been filed on that date, ECF No. 109, the period for filing comments having closed,

and no further commentary appearing as filed on the docket; Now, therefore, in view of the

foregoing, and upon other papers and proceedings, it is

ORDERED, ADJUDGEDand DECREED that Commerce’s Final Second Remand

Redetermination, Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition v. United States, CIT Consol. Ct.

No. 15-00164, slip op. 18-26 (July 20, 2018), ECF No. 106, be, and it hereby is, sustained.

 /s/ R. Kenton Musgrave 

R. Kenton Musgrave, Senior Judge

Dated: October 23, 2018

New York, New York
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-1467

___________

Nathaniel Taylor, Jr., *

 *

Appellant, *

 *

v. *

 *

The City of North Little Rock, a *

political subdivision of the state, *

 * Appeal from the United States

Defendant, * District Court for the

 * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Dexter Bunting, individually & in his *

official capacity as police officer for the * [UNPUBLISHED]

North Little Rock Police Department; *

Jay Ray, individually & in his official *

capacity as police officer for the North *

Little Rock Police Department; Larry *

Allen, individually & in his official *

capacity as police officer for the North *

Little Rock Police Department, *

 *

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: March 3, 1998

 Filed: April 17, 1998

___________

Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________
The Honorable Elsijane Trimble Roy, United States District Judge for the

1

Eastern District of Arkansas. 

-2-

PER CURIAM.

Nathaniel Taylor, Jr. brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action claiming defendant

police officers denied him due process when they used excessive force against him

while he was detained for driving under the influence of alcohol. Prior to a jury trial,

the officers moved in limine to exclude evidence of an alleged subsequent incident of

excessive force by defendant Dexter Bunting. Taylor responded that such evidence

was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), which provides that evidence

of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person to

show action in conformity therewith, but is admissible to show motive, opportunity,

intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake. The district court1

granted the motion, concluding that the alleged subsequent incident would likely be

unfairly prejudicial to all defendants. Following an adverse jury verdict, Taylor now

appeals the court&s evidentiary ruling. Having carefully reviewed the record and the

parties& submissions on appeal, we affirm the judgment of the district court on the basis

of the court&s order granting the motion in limine. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

      We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
Nos. 33-72130, 333-3846, 333-35215, 333-40634, 333-50330 and 333-75134 of Genta
Incorporated on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 33-85887, 333-94181,
333-101022 of Genta Incorporated on Form S-8 of our report dated March 10, 2004
with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Genta Incorporated and
subsidiaries, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Parsippany, New Jersey
March 12, 2004


                                       76
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-50535

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Efrain Rodriguez-Perez, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:23-CR-41-1

______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Stewart, and Southwick, Circuit 

Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Efrain Rodriguez-Perez appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal 

reentry after removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). In his sole issue on 

appeal, Rodriguez-Perez contends that § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because 

it allows a sentence above the otherwise applicable statutory maximum based 

on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 15, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-50535 Document: 00517003747 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/15/2023
No. 23-50535

2

a reasonable doubt. He has filed an unopposed motion for summary 

disposition and a letter brief explaining that he has raised this issue only to 

preserve it for further review and conceding correctly that this issue is 

foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). See 

United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019). Because 

summary disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 

F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), Rodriguez-Perez’s motion is GRANTED, 

and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Case: 23-50535 Document: 00517003747 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/15/2023