alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered September 23, 2021

In The 

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

No. 05

- 21

- 00305

- CV

MARK GROBA , Appellant

V.

CITY OF GALENA PARK , Appellee

On Appeal from the 80th Dist rict Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2020

- 01826

O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s September 20, 2021 second motion for

extension to file his brief

. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed

no later than October 20, 2021. We caution appellant that further extension

requests will be disfavored.

/s/ CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of K&F Industries Holdings, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Kenneth M. Schwartz, 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.

/s/ KENNETH M. SCHWARTZ
----------------------------------
Kenneth M. Schwartz
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 15, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Fabio Franco, Also Known as Fabio Franco-Ramirez, Appellant.

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered on April 27, 1988, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing defendant to a prison term of from seven years to life, is unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence *(People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302, 305).

*251Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms” *(People v Felman,*141 AD2d 889, 890, *Iv denied*72 NY2d 918). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Milonas, Asch and Kassal, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the quarterly Report of Derby Resources, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2011 (the Report), I, Frank Pioppi, 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 requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  Date: May 13, 2011 /s/Frank Pioppi     Chief Executive Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7624** 

CHARLES HARBISON , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. HAROLD CLARKE, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. Robert E. Payne , Senior District Judge. ( 3:14

- cv - 00687

- REP )

Submitted : March 31, 2016 Decided: May 19, 2016

Before MOTZ , DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. John Cady Kiyonaga , LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. KIYONAGA , Alexandria, Virginia, for Appell ant
. Eugene Paul Murphy , OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA , Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Charles Harbison seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 225 4 ( 2012 ) petitio n. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge is sues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) ( A ) (20 12 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (20 12 ). When the district court denies

r elief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists 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 the record and conclude that Harbison has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with ora l argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5742 

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide that tasks 

and services performed by certain individuals in postsecondary vocational 

institutions not be treated as employment. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2023 

Mr. MOOLENAAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide 

that tasks and services performed by certain individuals 

in postsecondary vocational institutions not be treated 

as employment. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Training Assignments 

5 for Student Knowledge Act’’ or the ‘‘TASK Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5742 IH

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF VOCATIONAL STUDENTS. 

2 Section 3(e) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 

3 (29 U.S.C. 203(e)) is amended by adding at the end the 

4 following: 

5 ‘‘(6) The term ‘employee’ does not include any 

6 individual who performs tasks and services required 

7 by a postsecondary vocational institution (as defined 

8 in section 102(c) of the Higher Education Act of 

9 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002(c)) to obtain a recognized 

10 postsecondary credential (as defined in section 3 of 

11 the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 

12 U.S.C. 3102)).’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### Sherry L. ELBERS, Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant/Respondent, v. Robert W. SMITH, Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff/Appellant.

No. 68818.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.

June 4, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 10, 1996.

Application to Transfer Denied Aug. 20, 1996.

M. Dwight Robbins, Frederiektown, for defendant/respondent.

Donald Rhodes, Bloomfield, for plaintiff/appellant.

Before CRANE, C.J., and FLANIGAN and HOFF, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the trial court’s judgment which awarded plaintiff portions of certain property held by the parties while they lived together unmarried. We have reviewed the record and the briefs filed by the parties and find that the circuit court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value.

The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT WILLIAM W. OSTRANDER, IV,

Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 2D23-1688 March 13, 2024 Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Gregory G. Groger, Judge. William W. Ostrander, IV, pro se. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. MORRIS, ATKINSON and LABRIT, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. ss.1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Michael J. Gordon, Chief Financial Officer of BlastGard® International, Inc., certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2006, as amended, of BlastGard® International, Inc.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



April 17, 2007



/s/ Michael J. Gordon

Michael J. Gordon, Chief Financial Officer
#### Cathy L. SCHMIDT, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Michael C. SCHMIDT, Respondent/Appellant.

No. 60976.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Southern Division.

Oct. 27, 1992.

Jeffrey P. Hine, Oliver, Oliver, Waltz & Cook, P.C., Cape Girardeau, for respondent, appellant.

David G. Beeson, Michael L. Jackson, Jackson, for petitioner, respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Husband appeals from decree of dissolution which dissolved a nine-year marriage between the parties.

An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b). •
Exhibit 32.2
     DAC TECHNOLOGIES GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of DAC Technologies Group InternationalInc (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Robert C. Goodwin, Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant toss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.
          /s/ Robert C. Goodwin
#### Trudy Howard LeBLANC, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 1224-87.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.

Oct. 19, 1988.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 9, 1988.

*583Buddy Stevens, Angleton, for appellant.

John B. Holmes, Jr., Dist. Atty., Frances M. Northcutt and Brian Rains, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted by a jury for murder and punishment was set at life imprisonment. The conviction was affirmed after an affirmative finding was deleted in *LeBlanc v. State,*737 S.W.2d 865 (Tex.App. — Houston [14th] 1987). Appellant filed a petition for discretionary review raising five grounds for review.

We have considered the issues raised and find that the Court of Appeals reached the correct result. The petition for discretionary review will be refused; however, a disclaimer is necessary. When considering appellant’s first point of error regarding the evidence corroborating an accomplice witness’ testimony, the Court of Appeals states that the corroborative evidence “need only make the accomplice witness’ testimony more likely than not.” *Id.*at 867-68. This test was specifically rejected in *Reed v. State,*744 S.W.2d 112 (Tex.Cr.App.1988), and cases cited therein at p. 125, footnote 10. We refuse appellant’s petition for discretionary review but disclaim the language in the Court of Appeals’ opinion which conflicts with the holding in *Reed,*supra.

Otherwise, the opinion of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Principal Financial Officer  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350  (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Stuart R. Lloyd, Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of PEC Solutions, Inc. (the "Registrant"), certify that to the best of my
knowledge, based upon review of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 of the Registrant (the "Report"):



|Date: March 16, 2005 |  | /s/STUART R. LLOYDName: Stuart R. Lloyd
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification shall also not be deemed incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by
reference.

---



QuickLinks
AXA

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 Annual Report on
  Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 of
  AXA S.A. (the Registrant), as filed with the United States Securities
  and Exchange Commission on
  the date hereof (the Report), I, Henri de Castries, Chief Executive
  Officer and Chairman of the
  Management Board of the Registrant, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
  as adopted
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
  knowledge that:

(1)The
  Report fully complies, in all materials respects, with the requirements of Section
  13(a) or 15(d)
  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)The
  information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
  the
  financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant, as of, and
  for,
  the periods presented in such Report.

The foregoing certification is provided
  solely for purpose of compying with the previsions of 
  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not intended to be used
  or relied upon 
  for any purposes.

| | /s/ Henri de Castries                                                
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | ____________________                                                 
| | Chief Executive OfficerChairman of the Management BoardApril 30, 2008

---

AXA

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 Annual Report on
  Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 of
  AXA S.A. (the Registrant), as filed with the United States Securities
  and Exchange Commission on
  the date hereof (the Report), I, Denis Duverne, Chief Financial
  Officer and a Member of the
  Management Board of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18. U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
  knowledge that:

(1)The
  Report fully complies, in all materials respects, with the requirements of Section
  13(a) or 15(d)
  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)The
  information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
  the
  financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant, as of, and
  for,
  the periods presented in such Report.

The foregoing certification is provided
  solely for purpose of compying with the previsions of 
  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not intended to be used
  or relied upon 
  for any purposes.

| | /s/ Denis Duverne                                                  
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| | ____________________                                               
| | Chief Financial OfficerMember of the Management BoardApril 30, 2008
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [B-7-2021]

                    On February 5, 2021, Wacker Polysilicon North America, LLC submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within Subzone 134B, in Charleston, Tennessee.                          ( print page 30915)    

                    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     inviting public comment (86 FR 9321-9322, February 12, 2021). On June 7, 2021, the applicant was notified of the FTZ Board's decision that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification was authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including Section 400.14.                

Dated: June 7, 2021.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2021-12195 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Andre Deshawn James , Appellant

No. 06

- 23

- 00058

- CR v.

The State of Texas , Appellee Appeal from the 349th District Court of
Houston County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 20CR

180 ). Memorandu m Opinion delivered by
Justice Rambin

, Chief Justice Stevens and
Justice van Cleef participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court
below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note th at the appellant, Andre Deshawn James , has adequately indicated his inability
to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JULY 2 8 , 2023 BY ORDER OF THE COURT SCOTT E. STEVENS CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey , Clerk