alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 5, 2014

No. 04-14-00274-CR

Perry Ellis MAYFIELD,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 79th Judicial District Court, Brooks County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11-07-10728-CR

Honorable Richard C. Terrell, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

On July 9, 2014, this court dismissed this appeal for want of prosecution because 

appellant failed to timely respond to this court’s order of June 12, 2014, by providing proof that 

the fee for preparing the clerk’s record had been paid. On July 16, 2014, appellant filed a motion 

for rehearing stating the order to show cause was misinterpreted by his staff and incorrectly 

calendared. Additionally, the fee for preparing the clerk’s record was paid on July 14, 2014.

It is therefore ORDERED that this court’s opinion and judgment dated July 9, 2014 are 

WITHDRAWN BY THE COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION. Appellant’s motion for rehearing 

is MOOT. The clerk’s record must be filed in this court no later than fifteen days from the date 

of this order.

It is so ORDERED on the 5th day of August, 2014.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ____________________________

Keith E. Hottle

 Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15286-15287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7142]



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


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Army Science Board; Notice of Open Meeting

    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (P.L. 92-463), announcement is made of the following 
Committee Meeting:

    Name of Committee: Army Science Board (ASB).
    Date of Meeting: 4 May 1995.
    Time of Meeting: 0800-1200.
    Place: Fort Gordon, GA.
    Agenda: The Army Science Board's (ASB) Battle Lab Issue Group 
and the Summer Study on ``Technology Transfer from the Technology 
Base to the Customer'' will visit three Training and Doctrine 
Command (TRADOC) Battle Labs. This meeting will be open to the 
public. Any interested person may attend, appear before, or file 
statements with the committee at the time and in the manner 
permitted by the committee. The ASB Administrative Officer, Sally 
Warner, [[Page 15287]] may be contacted for further information at 
(703) 695-0781.
Sally A. Warner,
Administrative Officer, Army Science Board.
[FR Doc. 95-7142 Filed 3-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4998 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4998

 To provide that the final rule of the Department of Homeland Security 
 entitled ``Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds'' shall have the 
         full force and effect of law, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 2023

Mr. Good of Virginia (for himself, Mr. Babin, Mr. Grothman, Mr. Norman, 
  Mr. Tiffany, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Gosar, Mr. DesJarlais, Mr. Mills, Mr. 
  Ezell, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mrs. Miller of Illinois, and Mr. Ogles) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide that the final rule of the Department of Homeland Security 
 entitled ``Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds'' shall have the 
         full force and effect of law, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Preserving Safety Net Integrity Act 
of 2023''.

SEC. 2. LEGAL EFFECT OF FINAL RULE.

    (a) In General.--The final rule of the Department of Homeland 
Security entitled ``Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds'' (85 Fed. 
Reg. 41292, August 14, 2019) shall have the full force and effect of 
law.
    (b) Conforming Change.--The final rule of the Department of 
Homeland Security entitled ``Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility'' 
(87 Fed. Reg. 55472, September 9, 2022) shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-2220

Puronics, Inc: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15286]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7092]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Intent to Grant a Limited Exclusive Patent License

    Pursuant to the provisions of Part 404 of Title 37, Code of Federal 
Regulations, which implements Public Law 96-517, the Department of the 
Air Force announces its intention to grant Advanced Optical Equipment & 
Systems Corporations, a corporation of the State of New Mexico, a 
limited exclusive license under: United States Patent No. 5,008,593 
filed in the name of L.A. Schlie for ``Coaxial Liquid Cooling of High 
Power Microwave Excited Plasma UV Lamps''; United States Patent No. 
5,055,741 filed in the name of L.A. Schlie for ``Liquid Coolant for 
High Power Microwave Excited Plasma Tubes''; United States Patent No. 
5,301,203 filed in the names of L.A. Schlie and R.D. Rathge for a 
``Scalable and Stable, CW Photolytic Atomic Iodine Laser''; United 
States Patent No. 5,235,251 filed in the name of L.A. Schlie for 
``Hydraulic Fluid Cooling of High Power Microwave Plasma Tubes''; U.S. 
Patent Application Serial No. 08/157,848 filed in the names of L.A. 
Schlie and R.D. Rathge for ``Turbo-Molecular Blower''; U.S. Patent 
Application Serial No. 07/949,615 filed in the names of L.A. Schlie and 
R.D. Rathge for a ``Repetitively Pulsed, Closed Cycle Photolytic Atomic 
Iodine Laser''; and U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 08/282,842 filed 
in the names of L.A. Schlie and R.D. Rathge for a ``Compact, Burst 
Mode, Pulsed, High Energy Blowdown Flow Photolytic Atomic Iodine Laser.
    The license described above will be granted unless an objection 
thereto, together with a request for an opportunity to be heard, if 
desired, is received in writing by the addressee set forth below within 
sixty (60) days from the date of publication of this Notice. Copies of 
the patents and patent applications may be obtained, on request, from 
the same addressee.
    All communications concerning this Notice should be sent to: Mr. 
Samuel B. Smith, Jr., Chief, Intellectual Property Branch, Commercial 
Litigation Division, Air Force Legal Services Agency, 1501 Wilson 
Blvd., Suite 805, Arlington, VA 22209-2403, Telephone No. (703) 696-
9050.
Patsy J. Conner,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-7092 Filed 3-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3910-01-M
#### William WELCH, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 55467.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

April 11, 1989.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 9, 1989.

Application to Transfer Denied June 13, 1989.

Janis C. Good, St. Louis, for movant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., William J. Swift, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

*442CRANDALL, Presiding Judge.

Movant, William Welch, pleaded guilty to stealing over one hundred-fifty dollars and second degree burglary. He was sentenced to concurrent seven year terms for each crime. Movant then filed a Rule 24.-035 motion alleging that his guilty plea was given involuntarily. He appeals from the denial of that motion without an evidentia-ry hearing. We affirm.

Movant argues, in his sole point on appeal, that the motion court erred in denying his motion without an evidentiary hearing because the record does not conclusively refute movant’s allegation that his guilty plea was given involuntarily. Movant was taking Dilaudin, a potent narcotic which was prescribed for his cancer, and contends the drug prevented him from fully comprehending the plea proceedings.

A movant is not entitled to an evidentia-ry hearing where the motion, files, and record of the case conclusively show that the defendant is not entitled to relief. Rule 24.035(g). The record of the guilty plea hearing conclusively refutes movant’s allegation. Movant testified that although he had used the drug Dilaudin that day, the drug did not interfere with his ability to understand the guilty plea proceedings. Further, movant coherently answered extensive questions by the trial judge relating to his understanding of his rights, his satisfaction with his attorney, and movant’s criminal culpability. The motion court was not clearly erroneous in denying movant’s Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed.

CRIST and DOWD, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of SAFER RESIDENCE CORPORATION (the Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report"), I, Melissa Blanchard, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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







/s/ Melissa Blanchard

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

Date: February 14, 2006

Melissa Blanchard

Principal Financial Officer
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4610

ECM Industries LLC: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions

_5-30-2019.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

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 Payless ShoeSource, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 2, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Steven J. Douglass, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive 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) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date: December 13, 2002



                                                  /s/  Steven J. Douglass
                                                  -----------------------
                                                  Steven J. Douglass
                                                  Chairman of the Board and
                                                  Chief Executive Officer






                                       20
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-3175

ITW Global Tire Repair Inc: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
---

EXHIBIT 32.2
  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C.
1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SOLAR ENERTECH CORP.
  (the “Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006,
  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
  “Report"), I, Fang Xie, Treasurer and Secretary – Principal
  Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
  or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|                      | */s/ Fang Xie*                                       
|--------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 12, 2006 |                                                      
|                      | Fang Xie                                             
|                      | Treasurer and Secretary - Principal Financial Officer

---
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4914

Scosche Industries, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T h e p a rtie s c o n s e n te dto th e ju r is d ic tio n o f th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e . See ** 28 U . S . C . § 6 36 (c ).

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** * w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T CL I FF ORD D I LB ER T, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. J O H N E. PO TTER, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 16405 D. C. No . 3 : 0 5 - c v - 0 0 0 8 7 - M EJ ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia M a r i a - E l e naJ a m e s , M a gi s tr a t e Judge , P r e s i di ng **

S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r19, 2010 *** B e f o r e : O ’S C A N N L A I N , L E A V Y , an dT A L L M A N , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . C l i f f or d D i l be rtappe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s s um m aryj udgm e nt i n hi s e m pl oy m e nta c t i on a l l e gi ng di s abi l i tya nd a ge di s c r i m i na t i on and 

# FI LED NO V 01 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 16405 2 ret al i at i o n . W e h av e j u ri sd i ct i o n u n d er 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e rev i ew fo r an ab u se o f d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n f

o rap p o in tm e n t o f

c o u n s e l. J

ohns on v . U

. S. T re asury D ep’t , 2 7 F .3 d4 1 5 , 4 1 6 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 4 ) ( p e rc u r ia m ) . W e a f f irm . T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on byde ny i ng D i l be rt ’ s m ot i on f o rap p o in tm e n t o f

c o u n s e l g iv e n th e u n lik e lin e s s o f s u c c e s s o n th e m e r its . See J ohns on , 27 F . 3d at41 7 (appo i ntm entof coun se l i n em pl oym entac t i on ); T erre l l v. B re w er , 93 5 F . 2d 10 15 , 10 17 (9th C i r. 19 91 ) ( 28 U . S . C . § 1 91 5 requi re s e x c e p tio n a l c ir c u m s tan c e s to w a rr an t ap p o in tm e n t o f c o u n s e l) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n b yd e n y in g D ilb e rt’s m o tio n to c o m p e l an dr e q u e s ts f

o rac o n tin u an c e o f

th e s u m m aryju d g m e n t m o tio n to o b ta in f u rth e rd is c o v e ry . See P re m i ng erv. P eake , 552 F . 3d 757, 768 n. 10 ( 9th C i r . 2008) (s ett i ng forth st andard of revi ew ). O n app ea l , D i l bertdo es no tchal l enge the m er i t s of the grantof sum m ary ju d g m e n t. See Sm i th v. M a rsh , 1 9 4 F .3 d1 0 4 5 , 1 0 5 2 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) ( “[ A ]r g u m e n ts no tra i se d b y aparty i n i t s openi ng bri ef ar e dee m ed w ai ved. ”) . D i l bert ’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. AF F I RME D.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed April 8, 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 19

- 00420

- CV

THE ESTATE OF MAYBEL LENE ANDERSON, DECEA SED

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PR

- 16

- 01315

- 2

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Molberg, and Nowell Opinion by Justice Schenck Before the Court is appellants’ motion asking that we withdraw their notices

of appeal. Appellants inform the Court that they no longer desire to pursue this

appeal. We construe the motion as a motion to dismiss the appeal. We grant the

motion and dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).

190420F.P05 /David J. Schenck/ DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE– 2

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

THE ESTATE OF MAYBELLENE ANDERSON, DECEASED

No. 05

- 19

- 00420

- CV On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PR

- 16

- 01315

- 2. Opinion delivered by Justice Schenck. Justices Molberg and Nowell participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

.

It is ORDERED that appellee U.S. Bank National Associ ation as Legal Title Trustee for Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust recover its costs of this appeal from appellants Jackquelyn Strickland, Erika Johnson, and Carlester Harper.

Judgment entered this 8 th day of April, 2020.