alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 10

- 00105

- CV

Northwest Independent School

District

v.

Carroll Independent School District §

§

§

§

§

§

§ From the 141st District Court

o f Tarrant County (141

- 210251

- 05 )

June 19, 2014

Opinion by Chief Justice Livingston

Concurrence and Dissent by Justice Dauphinot

Concurrence and Dissent by Justice
Gardner



### JUDGMENT

Having granted appellee Carroll In dependent School District’s motion for

en banc reconsideration, we withdraw our prior judgment of February 16, 2012

and substitute the following.

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was error in part of the tria l court’s order. We affirm the trial court’s denial

of appellant Northwest Independent School District’s plea to the jurisdiction to the

limited extent that appellee Carroll Independent School District seeks adeclaratory judgment regarding the meaning of the orders and judgments

creating the actual boundary location between the two school districts. We

reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s plea to the jurisdiction to the

extent that appellee seeks to contest and challenge appellant’s 1948 a nd 1949

elections, and the subsequent orders creating appellant and its boundaries, in an

attempt to move the existing boundary between the two districts. We remand the

case to the trial court for further proceedings on appellee’s declaratory judgment

cla im.

It is further ordered that each party shall pay its own costs of this appeal,

for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Terrie Livingston
C hief Justice Terrie Livingston
EXHIBIT 32.2
 CFO CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADDED BY
SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES  OXLEY ACT OF 2002
   (i)
    
    the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
  /s/ Robert Copple

Robert CoppleChief Financial Officer
 th
 /s/ Carol Waldman

Name: Carol WaldmanTitle: Notary Public
 06/07/12
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

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

United States of America,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

Michael Lacey, et al., 

 

 Defendants.

NO. CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Upon Motion of the Defendant, with good cause appearing, 

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant Michael Lacey leave to appear by telephone at 

the September 5, 2023 Hearing in this matter. 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1752-1 Filed 09/04/23 Page 1 of 2
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

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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Michael Lacey shall call 602-______at 10:25 

A.M. September 5, 2023.

SO ORDERED this _______ day of ___________, 2023.

___________________________

United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1752-1 Filed 09/04/23 Page 2 of 2
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 Florham Consulting Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph J. Bianco, Chief Executive Officer, 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 required by Section 906 has been provided to Florham Consulting
Corp. and will be retained by Florham Consulting Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.






/s/  Joseph
      J. BiancoJoseph
      J. BiancoChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)




August
13, 2010
#### Kirby L. ABRAM, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.

No. 56546.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 5, 1989.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 11, 1990.

Application to Transfer Denied Feb. 13, 1990.

Christopher E. McGraugh, Asst. Public Defender, Clayton, for movant-appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent-respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm.

Movant argues *Batson v. Kentucky,*476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986) applies for evaluation of his motion. His direct appeal became final in 1982. *State v. Abram,*632 S.W.2d 60 (Mo.App.1982). As in *Washington v. State,*772 *780S.W.2d 728, 730 (Mo.App.1989), *Batson*is inapplicable. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous and an extended opinion would have no precedential value; therefore, we affirm pursuant to' Rule 84.16(b).
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, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Xu
      Jie Bo, Chief Financial Officer 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 23, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                Xu Jie BoName:
                Xu Jie BoTitle:
                Chief Financial Officer




*
      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.
EXHIBIT A 

EXHIBIT A 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1970-1 Filed 11/14/23 Page 1 of 2
Defendants’ Joint Witness List for Evidentiary Hearing on 11.14.23)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

☐ Motion to Suppress

WITNESS LIST FOR 

EVIDENTIARY 

HEARING (CRIMINAL)

☐ Non-Jury Trial

☒ Jury Trial

USA vs. Michael Lacey, et al. CR-18-422-PHX-DJH

☐ GOVERNMENT ☒ DEFENDANTS

NO. NAME G/D DATE 

SWORN

DATE 

APPEARED

1 Boyle, Daniel

2 Ferrer, Carl

3 Stone, Andrew

4 Thai, Quoc

5 Versoza, Lyndon

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1970-1 Filed 11/14/23 Page 2 of 2
##### 



Certification of Periodic Financial Report
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 U S Liquids Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
William M. DeArman, 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/ WILLIAM M. DEARMAN                     
| |  |                                            
| |  | William M. DeArman,
Chief Executive Officer
| |  |                                            
| |  | July 3, 2003                               

This certification is made solely for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
```
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 121 (Friday, June 21, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 31917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15802]

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Sebastian Martin-Black Mesa Watershed, New Mexico

AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intention to delete structural measures and close the 
project.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, 
Public Law 83-566, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service 
Watershed Manual (390-V-NWSM, 2nd ed. 12/92), the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service gives notice of the intent to delete proposed 
watershed dam sites 15, 16, 17, 19 and 20 and close out the Sebastian 
Martin-Black Mesa Watershed Project in Rio Arriba County, New Mexico by 
withdrawing further Federal assistance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rosendo Trevino III, State Conservationist, 6200 Jefferson NE., 
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109-3734; Telephone 505-761-4402.

Sebastian Martin-Black Mesa Watershed, New Mexico

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice of Intent To Withdraw Federal Assistance

    A determination has been made by Paul Johnson, Chief, Natural 
Resources Conservation Service that because of the lack of available 
land rights for dam sites 15, 16 and 17; and because of an inadequate 
benefit cost ratio; and the lack of plans to complete the project in a 
timely manner by the local sponsors, Federal funding will be withdrawn 
from this project. The sponsoring local organizations have not 
concurred in this recommendation. Information regarding this 
determination may be obtained from Rosendo Trevino III, State 
Conservationist, at the above address and telephone number.
    No administrative action on implementation of this proposed 
withdrawal of funding will be taken until 60 days after the date of 
this publication in the Federal Register.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 10.904, 
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention. Office of Management and 
Budget Circular A-95 regarding state and local clearinghouse review 
of Federal and federally assisted programs and projects is 
applicable.)

    Dated: June 11, 1996.
Rosendo Trevino III,
State Conservationist.
[FR Doc. 96-15802 Filed 6-20-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-M
```
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Dwayne J. WINGO, Defendant/Appellant. Dwayne J. WINGO, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Nos. 66069, 67963.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

April 2, 1996.

Judith C. LaRose, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and GRIMM, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

A jury found defendant guilty of possession of a controlled substance, § 195.202, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced him as a persistent offender under § 558.016 to seven years. Defendant appeals that judgment and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgments are affirmed pursuant to Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b).
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 17

- 00808

- CV

Daniel CRISP

, Appellant

v.

Ismael CLAY

, Appellee

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CI10107

Honorable Angelica Jimenez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE WATKINS , AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the agreed motion to dismiss is

GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED.

We order that all costs of appeal, if any, shall be borne by the party that incurred them.

SIGNED February 13, 2019.

_________________________________ Beth Watkins , Justice
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40418

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALBERTO PEREZ-ORTEGA, also known as Alberto Perez-Ortego,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:13-CR-1203

Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alberto Perez-Ortega appeals the 36-month, non-guidelines sentence 

imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry following 

deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He challenges the substantive 

reasonableness of his sentence on the ground that it is greater than necessary 

to achieve the sentencing goals set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 9, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-40418 Document: 00512931357 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/09/2015
No. 14-40418

Because Perez-Ortega does not argue that the district court committed 

any procedural error in imposing the sentence, we limit our review to the issue

whether the sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 

552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). When the district court has imposed a sentence that 

varies from the guidelines range, reasonableness review requires that we 

evaluate whether the sentence “unreasonably fails to reflect the statutory 

sentencing factors” set forth in § 3553(a). United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 

704, 708 (5th Cir. 2006).

Although Perez asserts that the district court gave too much weight to 

his prior convictions and not enough weight to the fact that he had changed his 

life for the better and his benign motive for illegally reentering this country, 

the record does not reflect that the district court did not account for a factor 

that should have received significant weight, gave significant weight to an 

irrelevant or improper factor, or made a clear error of judgment in balancing 

the sentencing factors. See Smith, 440 F.3d at 708. Rather, the record reflects 

that the district court considered the Guidelines and policy statements, the 

sentencing factors of § 3553(a), the Presentence Report, and Perez-Ortega’s 

arguments in mitigation of his sentence. Additionally, although the 36-month 

sentence is 20 months greater than the top of the guidelines range, we have 

upheld much greater variances. See, e.g., United States v. Key, 599 F.3d 469, 

475-76 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Herrera-Garduno, 519 F.3d 526, 531-

32 (5th Cir. 2008).

Based on the totality of the circumstances, including the significant 

deference that is due to a district court’s consideration of the § 3553(a) factors, 

the sentence imposed was reasonable. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 50-53; United 

States v. Brantley, 537 F.3d 347, 349 (5th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, the district 

court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-40418 Document: 00512931357 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/09/2015
EXHIBIT 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 Amendment No.1 to
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Lightlake Therapeutics Inc. (the “Company") for the period ended October 31,
2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Kevin Pollack as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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: January 22, 2016



| | By:                                                                          | /s/ Kevin Pollack | 
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------- | 
| | Kevin Pollack                                                                |                  
| | Chief Financial Officer
        (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
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 

ELIZABETH A. STRANGE 

First Assistant United States Attorney 

District of Arizona 

KEVIN M. RAPP (Ariz. Bar No. 14249, kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov) MARGARET PERLMETER (Ariz. Bar No. 024805, margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov) ANDREW C. STONE (Ariz. Bar No. 026543, andrew.stone@usdoj.gov) Assistant U.S. Attorneys 

40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1800 

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 

Telephone (602) 514-7500 

JOHN J. KUCERA (Cal. Bar No. 274184, john.kucera@usdoj.gov) Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 

312 N. Spring Street, Suite 1200 

Los Angeles, CA 90012 

Telephone (213) 894-3391 

JOHN P. CRONAN 

Acting Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice 

REGINALD E. JONES (Miss. Bar No. 102806, reginald.jones4@usdoj.gov) Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section 

950 Pennsylvania Ave N.W., Room 2116 

Washington, D.C. 20530 

Telephone (202) 616-2807 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States America, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Michael Lacey, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 18-CR-00422-PHX-SPL 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF 

COUNSEL 

 NOTICE is hereby given, in accordance with Local Rule 83.3(a) of the Rules of 

Practice for the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, that Assistant United States 

Attorney Andrew C. Stone is associated as co-counsel for the United States in the abovecaptioned matter. 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 145 Filed 05/15/18 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

 Respectfully submitted this 15th day of May, 2018. 

ELIZABETH A. STRANGE 

First Assistant United States Attorney 

District of Arizona 

s/Andrew C. Stone 

ANDREW C. STONE 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that on this same date, I electronically transmitted the attached 

document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF system for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: 

Anne Michelle Chapman, Erin E. McCampbell, Gregory Michael Zamora, James C. 

Grant, Larry L. Debus, Lawrence I, Kazan, Lee David Stein, Paul John Cambria, Jr., 

Robert Corn-Revere, Ronald Gary London, Janey Henze Cook, John Lewis Littrell, 

Kenneth Morley Miller, Thomas Henry Bienert, Jr., Bruce S. Feder, Michael D. Kimerer, 

Rhonda Elaine Neff, David Seiyei Wakukawa, K. C. Maxwell, Michael L. Piccarreta 

and Stephen M. Weiss 

s/Gaynell Smith 

US Attorney’s Office 

 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 145 Filed 05/15/18 Page 2 of 2
#### Russell Paul BLOCK, Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Respondent.

No. WD 42366.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

April 24, 1990.

John E. Redmond, Kansas City, for appellant.

Marie W. Bower, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before MANFORD, P.J., and SHANGLER and-CLARK, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Russell Block appeals from the judgment of the circuit court that affirmed the decision of the Director of Revenue to revoke his driver’s license for one year under § 577.041, RSMo Supp.1989 for refusal to submit to a breathalyzer test.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).