alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
J
- S39027

- 16

NON - PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENN SYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee

v. DARNELL D. HARRIS, Appellant No. 1848 MDA 2015

Appeal from the Order Entered September 22 , 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County Criminal Division at No.: CP

- 41
- SA

- 0000028

- 2015

BEFORE: STABILE, J., PLATT, J. * , and STRASSBURGER, J. * JUDGMENT ORDER BY PLATT, J.: FILED MAY 09, 2016 Appellant, Darnell D. Harris, appeals from the trial court’s order dismissing his traffic citation for driving a commercial motor vehicle while his operating privilege is suspended 1 at docket numbe r SA

- 28

- 2015. We dismiss this appeal as moot. The relevant procedural background of this case is as follows. On September 22, 2015, Appellant entered a guilty plea, at separate docket number SA

- 34

- 2015, to charges of speeding at a hazardous grade and dr iving a commercial motor vehicle while his operating privilege is suspended. In exchange, the Commonwealth withdrew a second charge of

____________________________________________

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

1 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1606(c)(1)(ii).J
- S39027

- 16

- 2

-

driving a commercial motor vehicle while his operating privilege is suspended, at the instant docket number, SA

- 28

- 2015. ( See N.T. Summary Appeal, 9/22/15, at 2

- 4). On that same date, the court entered an order dismissing the citation at SA

- 28

- 2015. 2 ( See Order, 9/22/15, at 1). On October 22, 2015, Appellant filed a notice of appeal at SA

- 28

- 2015 only. ( See Trial Court Opinion, 12/24/15, at 1). On appeal, Appellant challenges the validity of the guilty plea he entered at SA

- 34

- 2015. ( See Appellant’s Brief, at 1). However, the trial court concluded that because the citation at the docket under which the appeal was fil ed, SA

- 28

- 2015, was dismissed, there are no issues properly before this Court. ( See Trial Ct. Op., at 1). We agree with the trial court. “Generally, a case will be dismissed if at any stage of the judicial process it is rendered moot.” Commonwealth v. Sloan , 907 A.2d 460, 465 (Pa. 2006) (citation omitted). Here, the trial court dismissed the citation at SA

- 28

- 2015; it imposed no penalty in this case. Because there is no meaningful relief that can be granted, we must dismiss this appeal as moot.

____________________________________________ 2 The court re

- imposed the fines and sanctions imposed by the magisterial district court judge on the charges at SA

- 34

- 2015.J
- S39027

- 16

- 3

-

App eal dismissed as moot. Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 5/9/2016
EXHIBIT 32.1








CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Charif Souki, Chief Executive Officer of the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Partnership.







Date: May 10, 2013


/s/ CHARIF SOUKICharif SoukiChief Executive Officer ofCheniere Energy Partners GP, LLC, the general partner ofCheniere Energy Partners, L.P.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Roderick Bartlett, President, Chief Executive Officer of TransAct Energy Corp., (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:  (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2016 (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 78 o(d)); 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: April 27, 2016   /s/ Rod Bartlett Roderick Bartlett President and Chief Executive Officer    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been furnished to TransAct Energy Corp. and will be retained by TransAct Energy Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 117 (Monday, June 17, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 30570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15164]



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

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

29 CFR Part 102


Rules Governing Misconduct by Attorneys or Party Representatives 
Before the Agency

AGENCY: National Labor Relations Board.

ACTION: Notice of Extension of Time for filing comments to proposed 
rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to a request from the Management Co-Chair of the 
American Bar Association Subcommittee on NLRB Practice and Procedure, 
the NLRB gives notice that it is extending by approximately 45 days the 
time for filing comments on the proposed rule changes governing 
misconduct by attorneys or party representatives before the Agency (61 
FR 25158, May 20, 1996).

DATES: The comment period which currently ends on June 19, 1996, is 
extended to August 2, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed rulemaking should be sent to: 
Office of the Executive Secretary, 1099 14th Street, NW., Rm. 11600, 
Washington, DC 20570.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John J. Toner, Executive Secretary, Telephone: (202) 273-1940.

    Dated, Washington, DC, June 11, 1996.

    By direction of the Board:
John J. Toner,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-15164 Filed 6-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7545-01-P
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Steven BAUER, Appellant.

No. WD 47292.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

March 15, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 3, 1994.

Susan L. Hogan, Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jennifer A. Glancy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before BERREY, P.J., and KENNEDY and ELLIS, JJ.

PER CURIAM:

*ORDER*

Appeal from conviction of four counts of forgery.

Affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
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 accompanying Quarterly Report of Vanguard Natural Resources,
LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the three months ended March 31,
2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), I, Scott W. Smith, President and Chief Executive 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:




1.
            The
      Report fully complies 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.








/s/
      Scott W. SmithScott
      W. SmithPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
                  (Principal
      Executive Officer)
                  
                  December
      19, 2008
SUBSIDIARIES OF CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES
COMPANY LIMITED



The particulars of the Company’s principal
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2012 are as follows:



|Name
        of Company                                    |  | Jurisdiction
        of
        Incorporation
|---------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------
|Shantou Airlines Company Limited                           |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Zhuhai Airlines Company Limited                            |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Xiamen Airlines Company Limited                            |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Guizhou Airlines Company Limited                           |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Chongqing Airlines Company Limited                         |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Guangzhou Nanland Air Catering Company Limited             |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Guangzhou Baiyun International Logistic Company Limited    |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Xinjiang Civil Aviation Property Management Limited        |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|China Southern Airlines Group Air Catering Company Limited |  | PRC                                          
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Nan Lung International Freight Limited                     |  | Hong Kong                                    
|                                                           |  |                                              
|Beijing Southern Airlines Ground Services Company Limited  |  | PRC
#### Steven M. MOHN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 47897.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Jan. 18, 1994.

Lorry L. Kohrs, Asst. Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before KENNEDY, P.J., and ULRICH and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from the dismissal of a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Supplemental agreement to the financial
service framework agreement



This supplemental agreement was entered into in Guangzhou between
parties as follows on 16 March 2013:



China Southern Airlines Company Limited (hereinafter referred
to as “Party A”)

At: 278 Airport Road, Guangzhou

Legal representative: Si Xian Min



Southern Airlines Group Finance Company Limited (hereinafter
referred to as “Party B”)

At: 17 South Hang Yun Street, Airport Road, Guangzhou

Legal representative: Wang Jian Jun



Whereas, this supplemental agreement, entered into by the parties
hereto after arm’s length negotiation under a mutual beneficial principle, is supplemental to a financial service framework
agreement dated 8 November 2012 between such parties (the "Principal Agreement") as follows:

| | I. | The first section of the eighth clause of the Principal Agreement (the “Transaction Cap”) shall be amended as:
“As agreed between the parties hereto, upon the date on which this agreement become effective, balance of deposit of Party
A to Party B on any particular date, accrued interest inclusive, shall not exceed RMB6 billion and balance of loan services provided
by Party B on any particular date, total interest expenses inclusive, shall not exceed the same.”
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | II. | This supplemental agreement constitutes a supplement to the Principal Agreement, where there is any contradiction between relevant
provisions thereof, this supplemental agreement shall prevail.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | III. | This supplemental agreement shall come into effect upon the date on which approval at a general meeting of Party A is obtained.
| | ---- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | IV. | This agreement is in quadruplicate of the same effect, each party shall hold two of which.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



(The following is intentionally left blank)











(Signature page for the Supplemental agreement to the financial
service framework agreement)



Party A: China southern Airlines Company Limited

Authorized representative: (Seal and signature)



Party B: Southern Airlines Group Finance Company Limited

Authorized representative: (Seal and signature)
Order entered August 21, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00380-CV

RICHARD A. MYERS, ET AL., Appellants

V.

LINDA PAVLIK, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-11-13928

ORDER

We GRANT appellant’s August 16, 2013 motion for an extension of time to file a notice 

of appeal. The notice of appeal filed by appellants on March 20, 2013 is deemed timely for 

jurisdictional purposes.

/s/ DAVID LEWIS 

JUSTICE
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6632

FRANK G. RENDON, 

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendant - Appellee, 

and 

OFFICER FOSTER, 

Defendant. 

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

Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:19-ct-03227-BO) 

Submitted: December 20, 2022 Decided: December 27, 2022

Before NIEMEYER and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit 

Judge. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Frank G. Rendon, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Coull Wilson, Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, 

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6632 Doc: 12 Filed: 12/27/2022 Pg: 1 of 3
2

for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6632 Doc: 12 Filed: 12/27/2022 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM: 

Frank G. Rendon appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil action under 

the Federal Tort Claims Act and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

orders. Rendon v. United States, No. 5:19-ct-03227-BO (E.D.N.C. Dec. 20, 2021 & May 

9, 2022). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6632 Doc: 12 Filed: 12/27/2022 Pg: 3 of 3
H. Res. 80 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 22, 2009. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be and are 

hereby elected to the following standing committee of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT.— 

Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California, Chairman; Mr. Chandler, Mr. 

Butterfield, Ms. Castor of Florida, Mr. Welch. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
EXHIBIT 13.1
                            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 Annual Report of EuroTrust A/S (the "Company") on
Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Aldo M.N.
Petersen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its
staff upon request.

Dated:  May 12, 2004                         /s/ ALDO M.N. PETERSEN
                                             -----------------------------
                                             Aldo M.N. Petersen
                                             Chief Executive Officer
#### DALLAS/FORT WORTH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BOARD, a Joint Board of the City of Dallas, Texas and the City of Fort Worth, Texas et al., Petitioners, v. The CITY OF IRVING, Texas et al., Respondents.

No. D-3927.

Supreme Court of Texas.

Sept. 29, 1993.

Rehearing Overruled Feb. 16, 1994.

Mike McKool, Jr., Eric W. Buether, Richard A. Lempert and David J. Labrec, Dallas, Paul C. Isham, Fort Worth, P. Michael Jung and Mike Joplin, Dallas, Gary E. Keane, DFW Airport, Kevin Cox, Dallas, for petitioners.

Bob McFarland and Paul F. Wieneskie, Arlington, Robert H. Power, Irving, Eliot R. Cutler, Washington, DC, Clarence A. Guit-tard, Dallas, Christopher Caso, Irving, Sam A. Lindsay, Dallas, Wade Adkins, Fort Worth, Louis I. Cole, Dallas, Perry M. Ro-sen, Washington, DC, Don J. Rorschach, Irving, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The principal issue in this case is whether the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board must comply with the local zoning ordinances adopted by the surrounding cities of Irving, Euless, and Grapevine to expand and develop the airport. The Board asserts that the zoning ordinances are preempted by both federal law and the Texas Municipal Airports Act (“TMAA”). *See*Tex.Rev.Civ. StatAnn. art. 46d-14 (Vernon 1993).

While this appeal was pending, the Texas Legislature enacted Senate Bill 348, which amends the relevant portions of the TMAA. Tex. Municipal Airports Act, ch. 93, § 4,1993 Tex.Sess.Law Serv. 182 (Vernon). Because the amendments took effect May 6,1993, the injunction judgment before this court is no longer based on currently applicable state law.

We express no opinion on whether federal law preempts the ordinances or on the validity, constitutionality, or applicability of the TMAA amendments. We grant in part petitioner’s motion to vacate the judgments of the lower courts because the amendments set out in Senate Bill 348 must be considered and may be dispositive. We vacate the judgments of the courts below and remand this cause to the trial court for consideration of the amended TMAA and further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

I 

United States of America, 

PLAINTIFF, 

,, FILED 

RECEIVED 

LODGED 

COPY :: 

vs. 

Scott Daniel Warren 

DEFENDANT. 

PRESIDING JUDGE 

Hon. Raner C. Collins 

HEARING DATE(S) 

May 29, 2019 

PLF DFT DATE SWORN 

1 5/e_c.t/ I "J 

2 f';}:r} IQ 

- 3 

4 

5 uJ3)1C\ . 

6 

7 ~,~1. °' 

8 1/ ;· r. '<; ,len Aerrl 

10 v rn 1,r\rn rlo..cn 

11 tv/t1lre?i 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

CR 18-00223-RCC-DTF 

JUN 1 1 2019 

~efRK US DISTRICT COURT °:s DISTRICT OF ARIZONA UTY BY DEP . 

WITNESS LIST 

u 

COURTROOM DEPUTY COURT REPORTER 

Sherry Gammon Erica McQuillen 

PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY(S) DEFENDANT ATTORNEY(S) 

Anna R. Wright; Gregory J. Kuykendall; 

Nathaniel J. Walters Amy P. Knight 

DATE APPEARED WITNESS 

_x;-hA~ s/?:rJ·, c John Marquez, United States Border Patrol 

5/30_· -. t.,faj,q Brendan Bums, United States Border Patrol 

Argelia Robles, United States Border Patrol 

Ned Ewing, United States Border Patrol 

ul3)1DJ Rogelio Velasco, United States Border Patrol 

Robert Hertzberg, United States Border Patrol 

51~119 Andrew Beglin, United States Border Patrol 

i• (~lit! Jose Sacaria-Godoy 

,.1 ~110 Kristian Perez-Villanueva 

1oltol1q t:;.e_-r~,clo ro.. rrcisco Ll.f'I ;.IPrl <.\./.m 1-P !;: -&rdp.,../? a irl\ \ I 

UNDER 

RULE_ 

✓ 

✓ 

✓ 

V 

✓ 

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 261 Filed 06/11/19 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit
      13.2




**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 Annual Report of China Southern Airlines Company Limited
      (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Si
      Xian Min, President of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
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 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:
                June 29, 2007
            By:
            /s/
              Si
              Xian MinName:
                Si Xian MinTitle:
                President




*
      This
      certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 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 the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




*
      A
      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.