alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00069- CV

Raul Cruz and T ony Cruz, Appellants

v. Ricardo Cr uz, Appellee

F ROM TH E CO UNTY COURT AT LAW NO . 2 O F TRAVIS CO UNTY NO. C-1 -CV- 11- 0099 55, H ONO RAB LE ERIC SH EP P ERD, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Raul Cruz and Tony Cruz appea l from a fi nal judgme nt awa rding appellee Ricardo Cruz $1,092.53 in damag es. After Raul and Tony failed to file a brief by a Court-imposed deadline of Aug ust 9, 2012, the cler k of this Court wrote them advising that their brief was overdue and that if they did not file a brief or otherwise respond by October 26, 2012, their appea l would be subject to dismiss al for want of prosec ution. The October 26 deadlin e h as passed, and Raul and 1 Tony have made no response . Acc ordin gly , we dismiss this appea l for want of prosec ution. See Tex. R. App. P . 38.8(a) ; 42.3(b).

Be cause the parti es share a common surname, we will use their first names to avoid 1 confusion.__________________________________________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton and H enson Dismissed for Want of Prosecution Filed: Nove mber 14, 2012

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

I, Vincent T.  Donnelly,
President and Chief Executive Officer of PMA Capital Corporation, do  hereby certify, to
the best of my knowledge, that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the  information contained in the Annual
Report of PMA Capital Corporation on Form  10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003,
filed with the Securities and  Exchange Commission, fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or  15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in  such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition  and results of operations of PMA Capital Corporation. 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/ Vincent T. Donnelly                                 
| |  | Vincent T. DonnellyPresident and Chief Executive Officer
| |  |                                                         
| |  | March ___, 2004                                         

---
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 948 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 948

Commending the participants and organizers of the World March for Peace 
                            and Nonviolence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 3, 2009

Mr. Lewis of Georgia (for himself, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Rush, Mr. 
 Payne, and Mr. Rangel) submitted the following resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Commending the participants and organizers of the World March for Peace 
                            and Nonviolence.

Whereas World Without Wars is coordinating a World March for Peace and 
        Nonviolence;
Whereas the international team of participants began their 93-day, 99,000-mile 
        journey around the world on October 2, 2009, the 140th anniversary of 
        the birth of Mahatma Gandhi;
Whereas, October 2, 2009, is also the United Nations' International Day of Non-
        Violence, which is observed globally and is intended to promote peace 
        through education and increased public awareness;
Whereas the World March for Peace and Nonviolence started in Wellington, New 
        Zealand, and will end in Punta de Vacas, Aconcagua, Argentina, on 
        January 2, 2010;
Whereas New Zealand was selected as the country in which to start the march 
        because it was the first country to grant women the right to vote and to 
        ban nuclear weapons and it is the only country in the world to create a 
        Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control;
Whereas New Zealand was also ranked first on the 2009 Global Peace Index, an 
        annual study ranking 144 countries on their relative peacefulness;
Whereas the idea of a World March for Peace and Nonviolence was developed during 
        the Symposium of the World Center for Humanist Studies held at the Park 
        of Study and Reflection in Punta de Vacas, Aconcagua, Argentina, on 
        November 15, 2008;
Whereas participants in the World March for Peace and Nonviolence will travel 
        through six continents and visit at least 90 countries in 3 months;
Whereas the World March for Peace and Nonviolence will visit Washington, DC on 
        December 1 and 2, 2009; and
Whereas the purpose of the World March for Peace and Nonviolence is to raise 
        awareness about global movements against violence, war, weapons, and 
        nuclear proliferation: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives commends the 
participants and organizers of the World March for Peace and 
Nonviolence for their commitment to global peace and nonviolence.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Geostar Mineral Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Andriy Protskiv, Chief Executive Officer and Chief 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| |    

Dated this 9thday of September, 2008.

ANDRIY PROTSKIVAndriy ProtskivChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer














---
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 19

- 00017

- CV

S.L.

, Appellant

V

.

S.L. , Appellee §

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 325th District Court

of Tarrant County ( 325

- 613438

- 17 )

July 30, 2020

Opinion by Justice Wallach

JUDGMENT

Th is court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that Appellant S.L. ( Mother) shall pay all of the costs of

this appeal

, for which let exe cution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

B y _ /s/ Mike Wallach

___________________ Justice Mike Wallach
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-2992

___________________________

Lexayra Lozano-Reyes

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of the United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

Submitted: August 6, 2018

Filed: August 16, 2018 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Lexayra Lozano-Reyes, a citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the decision

of an immigration judge (IJ) that denied her asylum and withholding of removal.

1

Lozano’s brief does not meaningfully challenge the IJ’s denial of relief under

1

the Convention Against Torture; consequently she has waived review of this claim. 
Lozano-Reyes claims that the BIA omitted key facts, mischaracterized the

record, and failed to consider relevant evidence in its past-persecution analysis; and

contends that this court should remand, pursuant to the “Chenery Doctrine,” for the

2

BIA to decide whether her alleged incidents, “in the aggregate” amounted to

persecution. Lozano-Reyes’s arguments are unavailing. See Malonga v. Holder, 621

F.3d 757, 764 (8th Cir. 2010) (where BIA essentially adopts IJ’s decision, but also

adds its own reasoning, this court reviews factual determinations of both decisions

together under substantial-evidence standard, and reverses only if petitioner

demonstrates that evidence compels contrary decision; BIA need not list every

possible factor in decision and has no duty to provide critical explanation on every

contention.)

Upon careful review, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the

finding that Lozano-Reyes failed to show past persecution in Mexico, or a wellfounded fear of future persecution there, due to any protected ground. See 8 U.S.C.

§ 1158(b)(1)(B)(i) (listing asylum grounds); Matul-Hernandez v. Holder, 685 F.3d

707, 711 (8th Cir. 2012) (applicant must show past persecution based on protected

ground to create rebuttable presumption of future persecution, or may show

objectively reasonable fear of particularized persecution in future due to protected

ground). Having failed to satisfy her burden of proof for her asylum claim, LozanoReyes has necessarily failed to satisfy the more rigorous standard for withholding of

removal. See Krasnopivtsev v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d, 832, 840 (8th Cir. 2004). The

judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

_____________________________

See Chay-Velasquez v. Holder, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004).

See Secs. & Exch. Comm’n v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194, 196 (1947) 2

(propriety of agency’s action must be judged “solely by the grounds invoked by

agency”; if stated grounds are inadequate or improper, court cannot affirm agency’s

action by substituting basis it considers to be more adequate or proper).

-2-
EXHIBIT 13.1
                                                                   ------------


                                  CERTIFICATION

          CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY RULE 13A-14(B) AND SECTION 1350 OF
                CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE

       In  connection  with the report of Vasogen Inc.  (the  "Company") on the
Form  20-F for the  fiscal  year  ended  November  30,  2006 as filed  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, David
G. Elsley,  President  and Chief  Executive  Officer of the  Company,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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/ David G. Elsley
----------------------------------
David G. Elsley
President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer),
Vasogen Inc.

January 30, 2007
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION Pursuant to the
requirements set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United
States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act), Jane A.
Freeman, the Chief Financial Officer of Scientific Learning Corporation (the
Company), hereby certifies that, to the best of her knowledge: 1.
  The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
  period ended December 31, 2003, to which this Certification is attached as
  Exhibit 32.1(the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of
  Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
  amended; and2.
  The information contained in the Periodic Report
  fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
  results of operations of the Company. Dated: March 26, 2004 /s/ Jane A. FreemanJane A. FreemanSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer This certification accompanies and is being furnished with this
Periodic Report, 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 liability under that Section and shall not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether
made before or after the date of this Periodic Report, irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### Joe Allen HARDY, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.

No. 56022.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Sept. 12, 1989.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 10, 1989.

Application to Transfer Denied Nov. 14, 1989.

llene A. Goodman, St. Louis, for movant-appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Robert V. Franson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent-respondent.

ORDER

Movant appeals from that part of a judgment, entered after an evidentiary hearing, denying his Rule 27.26 motion claim that his plea was involuntary because counsel was ineffective. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
EX-10.22






Exhibit 10.22




DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

(Effective as of July 1, 2008)





     The following table describes the standard arrangements pursuant to which non-employee
directors of FirstMerit Corporation will be compensated for their services.



	 	 	 
	Annual Retainer

	 	$27,000 annually
	 
	 	 
	Audit Chair Retainer

	 	$10,000 annually
	 
	 	 
	Lead Independent Director Retainer

	 	$60,000 annually and in
addition to the Annual
Retainer
	 
	 	 
	Board Meeting Fees*

	 	$2,000
	 
	 	 
	Audit Committee Chair Meeting Fees*

	 	$3,500
	 
	 	 
	Audit Committee Meeting Fees*

	 	$2,500
	 
	 	 
	Risk Committee Chair Meeting Fees*

	 	$3,500
	 
	 	 
	Risk Committee Meeting Fees*

	 	$2,500
	 
	 	 
	Compensation Committee Chair Meeting Fees*

	 	$3,100
	 
	 	 
	Compensation Committee Meeting Fees*

	 	$1,550
	 
	 	 
	Nominating and Corporate Governance
Committee Chair Meeting Fees*

	 	$2,700
	 
	 	 
	Nominating and Corporate Governance
Committee Meeting Fees*

	 	$1,350
	 
	 	 
	Executive Committee Chair Meeting Fees*

	 	$2,700
	 
	 	 
	Executive Committee Meeting Fees*

	 	$1,350
	 
	 	 
	Telephonic Meeting Fees*

	 	$750
	 
	 	 
	Annual Restricted Share Award

	 	$24,000 Restricted Share Value
	 
	 	 
	New Director Restricted Share Award

	 	$24,000 Restricted Share Value
on the day after the effective
date of the newly
elected/appointed director.








 




			
	*	 	Indicates fees paid on a per meeting basis.
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH   Document 1314   Filed 09/14/21   Page 1 of 4

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH   Document 1314   Filed 09/14/21   Page 2 of 4

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH   Document 1314   Filed 09/14/21   Page 3 of 4

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH   Document 1314   Filed 09/14/21   Page 4 of 4
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 116 (Friday, June 14, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30219-30220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15097]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-560-801, A-583-825, and A-570-844]


Notice of Postponement of Preliminary Determinations: Melamine 
Institutional Dinnerware Products From Indonesia, Taiwan and the 
People's Republic of China (PRC)

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Wojcik-Betancourt, Everett 
Kelly, or David J. Goldberger, Office of Antidumping Investigations, 
Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0629, (202) 482-4194, or (202) 482-4136, respectively.

POSTPONEMENT OF PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION: We have determined that 
respondent parties to these proceedings are cooperating, thus far, in 
these investigations. We also have determined that all cases are 
extraordinarily complicated because of the issues raised. The PRC 
investigation involves a legal issue of first impression

[[Page 30220]]

regarding whether the MNC provision, section 773(d) of Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1930 (the Act), 
is applicable in an NME investigation. Also, in the Taiwanese 
investigation petitioners are alleging that one of the Taiwanese 
respondents has established an export platform in the PRC involving the 
PRC company that is the subject of the MNC allegation. In the 
Indonesian investigation an allegation of an affiliation between the 
sole Indonesian respondent and its sole U.S. customer will require the 
Department to analyze the complex element of control, as set forth in 
newly amended section 771(33) of the Act on affiliated parties. In 
addition, the Indonesian and Taiwanese investigations, and possibly the 
PRC investigation, present complex model-matching issues involving 
significant product differences which will require substantial analysis 
of multiple products within the class or kind of merchandise under 
investigation. As a result of the novel and complex issues in these 
three investigations, the Department needs an additional time to fully 
analyze these issues. Accordingly, pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(B) of 
the Act, we are postponing the date of the preliminary determinations 
as to whether sales of melamine institutional dinnerware products from 
Indonesia, Taiwan and the PRC have been made at less than fair value 
for additional 30 days (i.e., until Wednesday, August 14, 1996).
    This notice is published pursuant to section 733(2) of the Act.

    Dated: June 6, 1996.
Barbara R. Stafford,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investigations, Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-15097 Filed 6-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America

Plaintiff,

v.

Andrew Padilla, et al.,

Defendant.

CR 18-00422-6-PHX-SRB

O R D E R

Upon the motion of the Defendant Andrew Padilla to waive his presence and to excuse his

attorney from appearing at the status conference set for June 24, 2019, at 11:00 a.m., for good

cause shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting the Defendant’s motion (Doc. 630) for the reasons

stated in the motion and waiving the presence of Defendant Padilla and excusing the appearance

of counsel for the Defendant at the status conference.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no excludable delay under Title 18 U.S.C. § 3161

will occur as a result of this Order.

DATED this 21st day of June, 2019.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 646 Filed 06/21/19 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1599

ROBERTO IFILL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal

Service,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (1:06-cv-01393-LMB)

Submitted: April 28, 2008 Decided: May 12, 2008

Before MICHAEL, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Francis H. Koh, KOH LAW FIRMS, LLC, North Bethesda, Maryland, for

Appellant. Chuck Rosenberg, United States Attorney, Kevin J.

Mikolashek, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Roberto Ifill appeals the district court’s order granting

the Postmaster General’s summary judgment motion on Ifill’s hostile

work environment and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title

VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e

to 2000e-17 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. Ifill v. Potter, No. 1:06-cv-01393 (E.D. Va.

Apr. 23, 2007). 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.

AFFIRMED
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 this amended quarterly report of ChromaDex Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10−Q/A for the quarter ending July 2, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Frank L. Jaksch Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Thomas C. Varvaro, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes−Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our knowledge:





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 Company.





Date: October 12, 2011


/s/ FRANK L. JAKSCH JR


Frank L. Jaksch Jr.


Chief Executive Officer





/s/ THOMAS C. VARVARO


Thomas C. Varvaro


Chief Financial Officer