alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Thomas Lee EVANS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 09-86-240 CR.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Beaumont.

Nov. 2, 1988.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 2, 1988.

Discretionary Review Refused Feb. 22,1989.

*761Jimmie P. Price, Price & Price, Conroe, for appellant.

F.M. “Rick” Stover, Thomas D. Glenn, Asst. Dist. Attys., Peter Speers, III, Dist. Atty., Conroe, for appellee.

OPINION

DIES, Chief Justice.

Appellant was indicted for Aggravated Sexual Assault twice enhanced. A jury found him guilty and assessed his punishment at ninety-nine years’ confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections, and a fine of One Thousand Dollars, from which appeal has been perfected to this court on one point of error, viz, “The trial court committed reversible error in charging the jury on the law of parole pursuant to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.07, section 4(a)_”

*Rose v. State,*752 S.W.2d 529 (Tex.Crim.App.1987), *on court’s own motion for rehearing,*752 S.W.2d 552 (Tex.Crim.App.1988), did hold such an instruction to be unconstitutional. However, in determining whether a new punishment hearing is warranted in cases where the jury was instructed as to the parole law, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that a harmless error analysis should be made pursuant to the test established by *TEX.R.APP.P. 81(b)(2),*which provides:

> “(b) Reversible Error.

> * 3⁄8 * * * *

> “(2) *Criminal Cases.*If the appellate record in a criminal case reveals error in the proceedings below, the appellate court shall reverse the judgment under review, unless the appellate court determines beyond a reasonable doubt that the error made no contribution to the conviction or to the punishment.”

In *Rose, supra,*the defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery and assessed a life sentence, the maximum possible. The court held that Rose was not entitled to a new punishment hearing, relying on these factors: (1) the giving of a curative instruction by the trial court, (2) the prior criminal history of the defendant, and (3) the facts of the case.

In our case, the trial court gave the curative instruction, which we must presume was followed by the jury. *Rose,*752 S.W.2d at 554. Appellant has two prior felony convictions. And, most important are the grizzly facts of this case. The complainant was awakened by the Appellant holding a knife. He repeatedly raped her vaginally and in the anus. He stuck his fingers in her vagina, his fingernails causing pain. While he was forcing anal intercourse, he stuck a toothbrush up her vagina. He forced the complainant to lick and suck his fecal-covered penis.

About this case, we adopt the words of Judge Teague in his concurring opinion to the majority opinion on the court’s own motion for rehearing in *Rose:*

> “[I]n light of the facts of this cause, I unequivocally state that there is not a reasonable possibility that any rational jury would have returned any other verdict that [sic] the one that the jury in this cause did: life imprisonment.”

752 S.W.2d at 557. Appellant’s point of error is overruled.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kennelle Clark, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CSAA General Insurance Company aka 

AAA Insurance Arizona, 

Defendants. 

Case No: CV18-00146-PHX-SRB

ORDER 

 

 The parties having stipulated thereto and good cause appearing, 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED dismissing this matter in its entirety with prejudice, 

with each party to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. 

 Dated this 6th day of March, 2018. 

Case 2:18-cv-00146-SRB Document 24 Filed 03/06/18 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 28597]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14070]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Switched Multi-Megabit Data Service Interest 
Group

    Notice is hereby given that, on March 6, 1996, pursuant to section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the Switched Multi-Megabit Data 
Service Interest Group (``the Group'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing changes to its membership. The notifications were 
filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the 
recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, the identity of the new member to the 
Group is Cascade Communications Corporation, Westford, MA.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and the Group intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On April 19, 1991, the Group filed its original notification 
pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of 
the Act on May 23, 1991, (56 FR 23723). The last notification was filed 
with the Department on June 23, 1994. A notice was published in the 
Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on September 26, 
1994, (59 FR 49084).
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 96-14070 Filed 6-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
Exhibit 13




Securities and Exchange Commission


100 F Street NE


Washington, DC 20549








Ladies and Gentlemen:




The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2012 (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.




Ms. Chanda Kochhar, the Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer, and Mr. N.S. Kannan, Executive Director & Chief Financial Officer of ICICI Bank Limited, each certifies that, to the best of their knowledge:




1.
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and




2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of ICICI Bank Limited.









Date: July 31, 2012














/s/ Chanda KochharMs. Chanda Kochhar

Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer/s/ N.S. KannanMr. N.S. KannanExecutive Director & Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. §1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of 2002, the undersigned officer of NTK Holdings, Inc. (“Company”), hereby
      certifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal
      quarter ended September 30, 2006 (“Report”) fully complies with the requirements
      of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934
      and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.











/s/
      Richard L. Bready


Name:
      Richard L. Bready


Title:
      President and Chief Executive Officer








Dated:
      November 3, 2006
Case 3:18-cv-08004-GMS--JZB   Document 9   Filed 01/26/18   Page 1 of 6

Case 3:18-cv-08004-GMS--JZB   Document 9   Filed 01/26/18   Page 2 of 6

Case 3:18-cv-08004-GMS--JZB   Document 9   Filed 01/26/18   Page 3 of 6

Case 3:18-cv-08004-GMS--JZB   Document 9   Filed 01/26/18   Page 4 of 6

Case 3:18-cv-08004-GMS--JZB   Document 9   Filed 01/26/18   Page 5 of 6

Case 3:18-cv-08004-GMS--JZB   Document 9   Filed 01/26/18   Page 6 of 6
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 Each of the
  undersigned officers of American CareSource Holdings, Inc. (the Company),
  certifies that:(1)
the Quarterly Report on Form
  10-QSB of the Company for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
  or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
  and(2)
the information contained
  in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
  condition and results of operations of the Company.  Dated: May
  9, 2006

/s/ Wayne A.
  SchellhammerWayne A.
  Schellhammer
  Chief Executive OfficerDated: May
  9, 2006

/s/ David S.
  BooneDavid S.
  Boone
  Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial OfficerDated: May
  9, 2006

/s/ Steve M.
  PhillipsSteven M.
  Phillips
  Controller and Principal Accounting Officer This
certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose. 34
EXHIBIT
        32.2
 STATEMENT
          REQUIRED BY 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 on Form 10-Q of BMX Development Corp.
          (FKA
          Biometrix International, Inc.) for the three months ended March 31, 2008,
          as
          filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
          "Report"), I, Dean A. Stewart, our Chief Financial Officer, certify
          that:
 
 *   the
          Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
          the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  *   information
          contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, our
          consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
 
 /s/
          Dean A. Stewart
 Dean
          A.
          Stewart
 
 
 May
          14,
          2008
 
 This
          certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
          Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required
          by the
          Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by us for purposes of Section
          18 of
          the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
          amended
Exhibit
31.1



Certification
of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant
to Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) As Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I,
Suren Ajjarapu, certify that:



|1. | I
    have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Trxade Group, Inc. (the “registrant”);                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|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;



|Date:
    July 17, 2020                                   | 
|--------------------------------------------------------- | 
|                                                          | 
|/s/
    Suren Ajjarapu                                    | 
|Suren
    Ajjarapu                                        | 
|Chief
    Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
#### Kurt M. HOWARD, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Janice Marie HOWARD, Respondent/Appellant.

No. 64558.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Aug. 16, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 19, 1994.

Lawrence G. Gillespie, Julie K. Morían, Eisen, Gillespie & Hilton, Webster Groves, for appellant.

Jill A. Silverstein, Merle L. Silverstein, Rosenblum, Goldenhersh, Silverstein & Zafft, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Former wife appeals the denial of her motion to modify the maintenance provisions of a decree of dissolution. We affirm. The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence; no error of law appears. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
OF


CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER AND


CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aspire Japan,
Inc., for the quarter ending July 31, 2008, I, Ken Osako, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Aspire Japan, Inc. hereby 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 and belief,
that:




1. Such
quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending July 31, 2008,
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 such quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended July 31, 2008, fairly represents in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Aspire Japan, Inc.




Dated:  September
      17, 2008






Aspire
Japan, Inc.




By:
            /s/
      Ken Osako
              Chief
      Executive Officer
              Chief
      Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1 / 32.2  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 Cytta Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert Gosine, Principal Executive and Financial 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.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  /s/ Robert Gosine Name:  Robert Gosine Title:    Principal Executive and Financial Officer Date:    May 19, 2009
Exhibit 32.1

                           Devine Entertainment Corp.

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350

      The undersigned  executive officer of Devine Entertainment Corp. certifies
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

1.    the quarterly  report on Form 10-Q of Devine  Entertainment  Corp. for the
      quarter  ended  June 30,  2008 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  Form  10-Q  fairly  presents,  in all
      material  respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations of
      Devine Entertainment Corp.

Date: August 13, 2008                       /s/ David Devine
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            David Devine
                                            Principal Executive Officer

Date: August 13, 2008                       /s/ Richard Mozer
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Richard Mozer
                                            Principal Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6324

FRANCIS J. GREEN, JR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

EARL BESHEARS; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE

OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA95-3172-S)

Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: July 31, 1996

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Francis J. Green, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988), as amended by Antiterrorism

and Effective Death Penalty Act 101996, Pub. L. No. 104-32, 110

Stat. 1217, petition. We have reviewed the record and the district

court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of probable cause to appeal; to the extent that such

a certificate of appealability is required, we deny such a certificate. We dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

Green v. Beshears, No. CA-95-3172-S (D. Md. Feb. 14, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit
23
 
 
 HANSEN, BARNETT & MAXWELL,
      P.C.
                A
      Professional Corporation
                CERTIFIED
      PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                5
      Triad Center, Suite 750
                Salt
      Lake City, UT 84180-1128
                Phone:
      (801) 532-2200
                Fax:
      (801) 532-7944
                www.hbmcpas.com
              
              Registered
      with the Public Company
                Accounting
      Oversight Board
 
 
 CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 To the
Board of Directors
 Sutor
Technology Group Limited
 
 As an
independent registered public accounting firm, we hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No.
333-161026) and on Form S-8 (No. 333-162144) of Sutor Technology Group Limited
and subsidiaries of our report dated September 28, 2010 with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Sutor Technology Group Limited. and
subsidiaries, which appears on page F-2 of this annual report on Form 10-K for
the year ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and exchange
Commission on September 28, 2010.
 
 
 /s/ HANSEN,
      BARNETT & MAXWELL, P.C.HANSEN,
      BARNETT & MAXWELL, P.C.
 
 Salt Lake
City, Utah
 September
28, 2010
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

FINCHIMICA S.P.A.,

Appellant

v.

ADAMA MAKHTESHIM LTD.,

Appellee

______________________ 

2017-2195

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2016-

00577.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

EDWARD ANTHONY FIGG, Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & 

Manbeck, PC, Washington, DC, argued for appellant. 

Also represented by SETH EDWARD COCKRUM, ROBERT 

DANNY HUNTINGTON. 

 NORMAN H. ZIVIN, Cooper & Dunham, LLP, New York, 

NY, argued for appellee. Also represented by ERIC 

EISENBERG, GARY GERSHIK. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, WALLACH and 

HUGHES, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

 August 9, 2018 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court
Case 4:18-cv-00039-CKJ-PSOT Document 22 Filed 08/10/18 Page 1 of 4
Case 4:18-cv-00039-CKJ-PSOT Document 22 Filed 08/10/18 Page 2 of 4
Case 4:18-cv-00039-CKJ-PSOT Document 22 Filed 08/10/18 Page 3 of 4
Case 4:18-cv-00039-CKJ-PSOT Document 22 Filed 08/10/18 Page 4 of 4
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Complaint of Julio Salas and Monica Salas 

As owners of the vessel “AZ 5368 BG.: and 

her engines, tackle, appurtenances, etc., 

Plaintiffs-in-Limitation. 

For Exoneration from or Limitation of 

Liability. 

No. CV-18-08019-PCT-JJT 

ORDER 

 

 At issue is Plaintiffs-in-Limitation Julio Salas and Monica Salas’s Motion for 

Default Judgment as to all possible claimants, known or unknown, who have not filed and 

served their claims or answers for claims arising out of the August 6, 2017 Incident 

Involving the Vessel (Doc. 49). The posture of this Motion is somewhat unusual, as 

Plaintiffs-in-Limitation do not seek to obtain money or other damages from any possible 

claimants in this matter, as is traditionally the function of a default judgment. But the Court 

recognizes that default judgment has been awarded in similarly situated cases and will enter 

it here, where Plaintiffs-in-Limitation seek to limit the universe of potential claimants who 

may file claims in this matter. See Tanguis v. Westchester MV, 2003 WL 200448 at *2 

(E.D. La. April 25, 2003). 

 However, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), “when an action presents more than one claim 

for relief, . . . the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer 

than all, claims or parties only if the court expressly determines that there is no just reason 
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

for delay.” Here, Plaintiffs-in-Limitation do not attempt to demonstrate there is no just 

reason for delay of entry of a partial final judgment, nor does the Court so find. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED granting in part Plaintiffs-in-Limitations’ 

Motion for Default Judgment as to all possible claimants, known or unknown, who have 

not filed and served their claims or answers for claims arising out of the August 6, 2017 

Incident Involving the Vessel (Doc. 49). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs-in-Limitation Julio Salas and Monica 

Salas will be entitled to judgment as against all claimants, known and unknown, who have 

not filed their claim or otherwise appeared in this action, except to the extent that such 

claimant(s) can demonstrate good cause for the Court to set aside the default judgment 

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c) and 60(b). 

 Dated this 16th day of August, 2019. 

Honorable John J. Tuchi 

United States District Judge