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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 967 

Recognizing the 15th anniversary of the establishment of the Community 

Development Financial Institutions Fund and reaffirming the importance 

of its mission of economic and community development. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 11, 2009 

Ms. CLARKE (for herself, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Ms. MOORE of 

Wisconsin, Mrs. MALONEY, Mr. HINOJOSA, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. CLAY, Mr. 

DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan, 

Mr. TOWNS, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. BORDALLO, Mr. WATT, Mr. MEEK of 

Florida, and Mr. MEEKS of New York) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 15th anniversary of the establishment of 

the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund 

and reaffirming the importance of its mission of economic and community development. 

Whereas, on September 23, 1994, the United States Government created the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the Fund’’), 

an agency of the Federal Government located within the 

United States Department of the Treasury; 

Whereas the United States Government declared the Fund’s 

purpose to be the promotion of economic and community 

development; 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 967 IH 

Whereas the United States Government directed that this 

purpose be pursued through investment in and assistance 

to community development financial institutions, including enhancing the liquidity of community development financial institutions; 

Whereas the United States Congress determined that the 

Fund had to be created in order to address the economic 

and social challenges resulting from low economic growth, 

escalating levels of poverty, and limited employment opportunities in some rural, urban, and Native American 

communities; and 

Whereas the Fund has demonstrated for 15 years its ability 

to consistently play a role in the important work of expanding economic opportunity and promoting positive 

economic and social outcomes for all United States citizens: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the 15th anniversary of the his3 toric establishment of the Community Development 

4 Financial Institutions Fund; 

5 (2) acknowledges that the purpose of the Com6 munity Development Financial Institutions Fund is 

7 to promote economic revitalization in underserved 

8 rural, urban, and Native American communities; 

9 (3) reaffirms the importance of agency invest10 ments in and assistance to financial institutions 

11 which conduct economic and community develop12 ment; and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 967 IH 

1 (4) asserts the relevance of the Community De2 velopment Financial Institutions Fund as an indis3 pensable agency engaged in the business of pro4 moting both job creation and retention, as well as 

5 economic growth. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00775-CR

Frank Arrevalo, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 69426, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Frank Arrevalo is attempting to appeal from a judgment of conviction for

the offense of injury to an elderly person. The district court imposed sentence on August 27, 2012,

and no motion for new trial was filed. Thus, the deadline for perfecting appeal was September 26,

2012. Arrevalo filed a pro se notice of appeal on November 15, 2012, asserting that his appointed

trial counsel failed to timely file a notice of appeal on his behalf. Subsequently, the district court

appointed appellate counsel to represent Arrevalo, and counsel filed an amended notice of appeal

on November 26, 2012.

Absent a timely filed notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction to dispose of

this appeal in any manner other than by dismissing it for want of jurisdiction. See Slaton v. State,
981 S.W.2d 208 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.1

__________________________________________

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Rose

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: June 21, 2013

Do Not Publish

Any remedy Arrevalo may have for a late-filed notice of appeal would be sought through

1

a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See

Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07.

2
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF 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 the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Novus Robotics, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2012, I, Berardino Paolucci, Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer/Principal Financial Officer)of Novus Robotics, 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 fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2012, 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 fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2012, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Novus Robotics, Inc.








Date: October 24, 2012
/s/ Berardino PaolucciBerardino Paolucci

President/Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer/Principal Financial Officer)
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 02, 2020.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, September 02, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21D0030. IN THE INTEREST OF C. J. P., A CHILD (MOTHER) .

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Juvenile Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

1900462
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-35,575-29

IN RE JAMES WESLEY MCCARTNEY, Relator

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

CAUSE NOS. CR920532A & CR920533A IN THE 51ST DISTRICT COURT

FROM TOM GREEN COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Relator has filed a motion for leave to file an application for a writ of mandamus under this

Court’s original jurisdiction. He contends that he filed two applications for writs of habeas corpus

in Tom Green County and his applications have not been properly forwarded to this Court.

Respondent, the District Clerk of Tom Green County, shall forward Relator’s habeas

applications to this Court, respond that Relator has not filed habeas applications in Tom Green

County, or forward a copyof an order designating issues together with correspondence documenting

the date the State received Relator’s habeas applications. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07,

§ 3(c) and (d); TEX. R. APP. P. 73.4(b)(5). This motion for leave to file will be held. Respondent

shall comply with this order within thirty days from the date of this order.
2

Filed: February 16, 2022

Do not publish
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 14.0

                       INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION GROUP, INC.
                             CODE OF BUSINESS ETHICS

In my role as a [director/executive/controller] of the Industrial Distribution
Group, Inc. ("IDG"), I certify to you, the Board of Directors, that I adhere to
and advocate the following principles and responsibilities governing my
professional and ethical conduct.

To the best of my knowledge and ability:

1.       I act with honesty and integrity, avoiding actual or apparent conflicts
         of interest in personal and professional relationships.

2.       I provide constituents with information that is accurate, complete,
         objective, relevant, timely and understandable.

3.       I comply with rules and regulations of federal, state, provincial and
         local governments, and other appropriate private and public regulatory
         agencies.

4.       I act in good faith, responsibly, with due care, competence and
         diligence, without misrepresenting material facts or allowing my
         independent judgment to be subordinated.

5.       I respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of
         my work except when authorized or otherwise legally obligated to
         disclose. Confidential information acquired in the course of my work is
         not used for personal advantage.

6.       I share knowledge and maintain skills important and relevant to my
         constituents' needs.

7.       I proactively promote ethical behavior as a responsible partner among
         peers in my work environment.

8.       I achieve responsible use of and control over all assets and resources
         employed or entrusted to me.

9.       I proactively promote the resolution of associate concerns in support
         of our Code of Business Ethics.



------------------------------------------
[Name and Title]

[Date]
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RAYMOND LEE KYLE,

Petitioner,

CASE NO. 08-CV-14781

v. HONORABLE GEORGE CARAM STEEH

KENNETH ROMANOWSKI,

Respondent.

________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S REQUEST TO EXPAND RULE 5 MATERIALS

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s “Objection to Respondent’s Version of

Rule 5 Materials” [Dkt. 7 & 8], which the Court construes as a request to expand the Rule 5

materials submitted by Respondent. Petitioner seeks the addition of the prosecutor’s brief in

response to his state court motion for relief from judgment, referred to as a “6.500 motion” in his

pleadings. Petitioner asserts that the brief contains information relevant to his habeas claims and

contains material and exculpatory evidence used by the prosecution and defense at trial. 

Respondent has not filed a response to the objections.

Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, Respondent is required to

submit all transcripts and documents relevant to the determination of the habeas petition at the time

the answer is filed. See Rule 5, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. The Court may also require that the record

be expanded to include additional materials relevant to the determination of the habeas petition. 

See Rule 7, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. Having reviewed the pleadings, the Court finds that the

document requested by Petitioner may be relevant to his habeas claims and may assist the Court in

2:08-cv-14781-GCS-MJH Doc # 9 Filed 06/24/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 2708
2

resolving this matter. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s request and ORDERS

Respondent to file the requested document within 30 days of the filing date of this order if

Respondent has not already done so.

Dated: June 24, 2009

s/George Caram Steeh 

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on

June 24, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Josephine Chaffee

Deputy Clerk

2:08-cv-14781-GCS-MJH Doc # 9 Filed 06/24/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 2709
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

THOMAS BLUMENTHAL,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL CURLEY,

Respondent.

/

Case Number: 08-cv-14858

Honorable Victoria A. Roberts 

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PETITIONER’S MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL AND

DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AS MOOT

On November 19, 2008, Petitioner Thomas Blumenthal filed a pro se Petition for a Writ

of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging that he is incarcerated in violation of

his constitutional rights. Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s “Motion to Appoint Counsel”

[Dkt. #14], and “Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis” [Dkt. # 15].

The constitutional right to counsel in criminal proceedings provided by the Sixth

Amendment does not apply to an application for writ of habeas corpus, which is a civil

proceeding. Cobas v. Burgess, 306 F.3d 441, 444 (6th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 984

(2003), reh. denied, 539 U.S. 970 (2003). There exists no constitutional right to the appointment

of counsel in habeas cases, and the Court has broad discretion in determining whether counsel

should be appointed. Childs v. Pellegrin, 822 F.2d 1382, 1384 (6th Cir. 1987) (“[A]ppointment

of counsel in a civil case is . . . a matter within the discretion of the court. It is a privilege and

not a right.”) (internal quotation omitted). A habeas petitioner may obtain representation at any

stage of the case “[w]henever the United States magistrate or the court determines that the

interests of justice so require.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). In the instant case, the Court

2:08-cv-14858-VAR-RSW Doc # 17 Filed 01/15/10 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 491
2

determines, after careful consideration, that the interests of justice do not require appointment of

counsel at this time.

Regarding Petitioner’s “Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis,” the Court finds that

Petitioner paid the necessary filing fee when he filed his Petition [Dkt. # 1]; no other fee is

required. Thus, Petitioner’s Motion is denied as moot.

Accordingly, Petitioner’s “Motion to Appoint Counsel” [Dkt. # 14] is DENIED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court will reconsider Petitioner’s Motion if it determines at a

later date that appointment of counsel is necessary. Petitioner need not file any additional

motions regarding this issue.

 FURTHER ORDERED Petitioner’s “Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis” is

DENIED as moot.

ORDERED.

s/Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: January 15, 2010

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of record

AND Thomas Blumenthal by electronic means or

U.S. Mail on January 15, 2010.

s/Carol A. Pinegar 

Deputy Clerk

2:08-cv-14858-VAR-RSW Doc # 17 Filed 01/15/10 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 492
Fialka-Feldman v. Oakland University Board of Trustees Doc. 43 Att. 23

Dockets.Justia.com
EX-10.28



 Exhibit 10.28 

This is a translation of the original Chinese text. 

January 17, 2014 
 To: Beike Internet (Beijing) Security
Technology Co., Ltd. (the “VIE Entity”) 
 To Whom It May Concern: 

To ensure the cash flow requirements of the VIE entity’s operations are met and/or to set off any loss accrued during such operations, the undersigned,
Beijing Kingsoft Internet Security Software Co., Ltd. (the “WFOE”), is obligated and hereby undertakes to provide unlimited financial support to the VIE Entity, to the extent permissible under the applicable PRC laws and
regulations, whether or not any such operational loss is actually incurred. The form of financial support shall include, but not limited to, extension of cash, entrusted loans and borrowings. WFOE will not request repayment of the loans or
borrowings if the VIE Entity or its shareholders do not have sufficient funds or are unable to repay. 
 The undersigned agrees and acknowledges such
undertaking shall be irrevocable and continuously valid from January 1, 2011 until the earlier of (1) the date on which all of the equity interests of the VIE Entity have been acquired directly or indirectly by WFOE or its designated
representative (individual or legal person); or (2) the date of unilateral termination by WFOE, at its sole and absolution discretion, by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice to the VIE Entity of its intention to terminate this
letter. 
 Please confirm receipt of this letter by returning a signed copy of this letter to the undersigned. 

 

			
	Beijing Kingsoft Internet Security Software Co., Ltd.
		
	By/Chop:	 	/s/ Common seal of Beijing Kingsoft Internet Security Software Co., Ltd.
----

EXHIBIT 32.1 

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report ofOpencell Biomed Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10]QSB for the period ending May 31, 2010 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, MislavPavelic, in my capacities set forth below of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes]Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge: 

(1) 

The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and 
(2) 

The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. 

July 15, 2010
/s/ Mislav Pavelic                                 
 
Mislav Pavelic, President
 
(as Principal Executive Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 972 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 972

 Commending University of Alabama running back Mark Ingram on winning 
                        the 2009 Heisman Trophy.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 15, 2009

Mr. Davis of Alabama (for himself, Mr. Bonner, Mr. Griffith, Mr. Rogers 
   of Alabama, Mr. Aderholt, and Mr. Bright) submitted the following 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Commending University of Alabama running back Mark Ingram on winning 
                        the 2009 Heisman Trophy.

Whereas Mark Ingram was born to Mark Ingram Sr. and Shonda Ingram in Hackensack, 
        New Jersey, on December 21, 1989;
Whereas Mark Ingram's mother and father have instilled in him an unparalleled 
        sense of determination and persistence which has driven him to success 
        on and off the football field;
Whereas Mark Ingram was named the 2009 offensive player of the year by the 
        Associated Press and continues the outstanding legacy of success as part 
        of the University of Alabama football program;
Whereas Mark Ingram set the Crimson Tide single-season rushing record, running 
        for 1,542 yards in the 2009 season and led the Nation in rushing with 38 
        runs of 10 yards or more, and 13 runs of 20 yards or more;
Whereas Mark Ingram is a Dean's List student at the University of Alabama;
Whereas Mark Ingram caught 30 passes for 322 yards in the 2009 season;
Whereas Mark Ingram averaged 178 rushing yards per game against Top 25 teams;
Whereas Mark Ingram played an integral role in Alabama's 32-13 victory over 
        Florida propelling them to win the SEC Championship; and
Whereas, on December 12, 2009, Mark Ingram became the first Alabama player to 
        receive the Heisman Trophy, college football's most coveted and 
        prestigious award: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) commends Mark Ingram on his academic and athletic 
        accomplishments;
            (2) congratulates Mark Ingram on winning the 2009 Heisman 
        Trophy; and
            (3) directs the Clerk of the House of Representatives to 
        transmit a copy of this resolution to University of Alabama 
        President Dr. Robert E. Witt and Head Football Coach Nick Saban 
        for appropriate display.
                                 <all>
```
#### Robert Stephen PENHAKER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 0482-85.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.

May 21, 1986.

Appeal from 176th District Court, Harris County, William Hatten, Judge.

Prior report: Tex.App., 689 S.W.2d 233 (1985).

Before the court en banc.

On appellant’s petition for discretionary review: judgment of the Court of Appeals reversed; cause remanded to that court.

TEAGUE, J., concurs in the result.
Exhibit 12.2



CERTIFICATION

I, Simona Green, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of RiT Technologies Ltd.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;



3.

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



4.

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





a.

designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;





b.

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report; and





c.

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



5.

The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):





a.

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





b.

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





Date: June 30, 2004

BY: /S/ Simona Green

Simona Green

Vice President Finance