alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER Appellate case name: Richard Calvert and Melissa Calvert Morris v. Deborah Calvert Crawley, Robert D. Calvert, Jr., and Laura Calvert Bates Appellate case number: 01

- 20

- 001 0 5

- CV
Trial court case number: 271290

- 403
Trial court: County Probate Court No. 4 of Harris County Appellant s, Richard Calvert and Melissa Calvert Morris, timely filed their notice of appeal on January 29, 2020. Appellants’ filing date established a deadline of February 12, 2020 , for any other party wishing to file a notice of appeal

. On February 20, 2020, appellees/cross

- appellants, Deborah Calvert Crawl e y , Robert D. Calvert, Jr., and Laura Calvert Bates, filed their “Notice of Conditional Cross

- Appeal.” On March 31, 2020 , t he Clerk of this Court notified a ppellees/cross

- appellants that the cross
- appeal was subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction b ecause the notice of conditional cross

- appeal did not appear to be timely filed. Appellees/cross

- a ppellant s responded with a “Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Conditional Cross

- Appeal,” in which t he y provide a reasonable explanation for the failure to file the notice of cross
- appeal timely. 1 See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C), 26.3; see also Jones v. City of Houston , 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex. 1996) (explaining, although motion for extension is implied, appellant must provide reasonable explanation for failing to file notice of appeal timely). Accordingly, we grant appellees’/cross

- appellants’ “Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Conditional Cross

Appeal

. ”

1 A motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal is implied when a party , acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by rule 26.1, but within the fifteen

- day extension period provided by rule 26.3. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 2 6.1, 26.3; Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617

– 18 (Tex. 1997).Appell ees/cross

- appellants have also filed a “Motion for Leave to Assert Cross

Appeal Points in the Appellee[s’] Brief

. ” The motion is d enied

. Cross

- Appellants’ brief, if any, is due 30 days from the date of this order. It is so ORDERED. Judge’s signature: _______ /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

_____  Acting individually  Acting for the Court Date: ___ April 14, 2020

____
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Quarterly Report of Freshwater Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Max Weissengruber, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 position and results of operations of the Company.





Date: May 13, 2011





/s/ Max Weissengruber


Max Weissengruber


President, Chief Executive Officer and Director


(Principal Executive Officer)
cbmg_ex1032.htm


Exhibit 10.32


 




  





1











  






 


 




  





2











  






 


 




  





3











  






 


 




  





4











  






 


 




  





5











  






 


 




  





6











  






 


 




  





7











  






 


 




  





8











  






 


 




  





9











  






 


 




  





10











  






 


 


11
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 409

To repeal the increase in the tax on transportation fuels made by the Revenue

Reconciliation Act of 1993.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. ZIMMER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To repeal the increase in the tax on transportation fuels

made by the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF TAX INCREASE ON TRANSPOR4 TATION FUELS.

5 Part IV of subchapter B of the Revenue Reconcili6 ation Act of 1993 is hereby repealed, and the Internal

7 Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied and administered

8 as if such part (and the amendments made thereby) had

9 not been enacted.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WILLARD L. SLOAN, EUGENE J. 

WINNINGHAM, and JAMES L. 

KELLEY,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BORGWARNER INC., 

BORGWARNER DIVERSIFIED 

TRANSMISSION PRODUCTS 

INC., and BORGWARNER 

FLEXIBLE BENEFITS PLANS,

Defendants.

Case 2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM

U.S. District Judge Paul D. Borman

U.S. Mag. Judge Mona K. Majzoub

NOTICE REGARDING TACKETT

In accordance with the order of this Court dated June 20, 2014, BorgWarner 

Inc., BorgWarner Diversified Transmission Products Inc., and BorgWarner Flexible 

Benefits Plans hereby provide notice that on January 26, 2015, the Supreme Court 

of the United States decided M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett. The Supreme 

Court vacated the Sixth Circuit’s decision, and after reviewing the many inferences 

regarding vesting of retiree benefits set forth in International Union, UAW v. YardMan, Inc., 716 F.2d 1476 (6th Cir. 1983), and its progeny, ruled that those 

inferences “conflict with ordinary principles of contract law” and are improper. No. 

13-1010, 2015 WL 303218, at *6 (U.S. Jan. 26, 2015) (attached). BorgWarner 

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 135 Filed 01/29/15 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 7527
2

respectfully suggests that the Court convene a status conference to discuss a 

process for reconsideration of the Court’s prior summary judgment ruling.

Dated: January 29, 2015

Elisa Angeli Palizzi (P52088)

(angeli@millercanfield.com)

Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, 

P.L.C.

150 West Jefferson, Suite 2500

Detroit, Michigan 48226

313.496.7635

313.963.6420 fax

Respectfully submitted,

s/Joshua David Rogaczewski

Bobby R. Burchfield

(bburchfield@mwe.com)

Joshua David Rogaczewski 

(jrogaczewski@mwe.com)

McDermott Will & Emery LLP

The McDermott Building

500 North Capitol Street, Northwest

Washington, D.C. 20001

202.756.8000 

202.756.8087 fax

Attorneys for BorgWarner Inc., BorgWarner Diversified Transmission Products 

Inc., and BorgWarner Flexible Benefits Plans

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 135 Filed 01/29/15 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 7528
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 29, 2015, I electronically filed the foregoing 

Notice Regarding Tackett with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system 

which will send notification of such filing to all ECF participants.

s/Joshua David Rogaczewski

Joshua David Rogaczewski 

(jrogaczewski@mwe.com)

McDermott Will & Emery LLP

The McDermott Building

500 North Capitol Street, Northwest

Washington, D.C. 20001

202.756.8195

202.591.2757 fax

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 135 Filed 01/29/15 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 7529
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WOODLAND HARVESTING, INC.,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09-10736

-vs- Hon: AVERN COHN

GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION,

Defendant. 

/

SCHEDULING ORDER

This is a commercial dispute. On May 09, 2011, the Court held a status conference

in this case. This order memorializes the rulings that the Court made at the conference.

1. The case is set for trial on Monday, November 14, 2011, at 9:00 am.

2. At least thirty (30) days prior to trial, each party shall lodge with the Court:

(A) a list of witnesses to be called at trial;

(B) an exhibit list numbered for trial, together with a book of the listed

exhibits;

(C) a verdict form;

(D) a set of the instructions on the law of the case consistent with the

verdict form; and

(E) an itemized list of the damages plaintiff suffered to be asked of the

jury.

4. The parties have some discovery disputes. To expedite consideration by the

Court, each party within ten (10) days shall lodge with the Court a proposed order reflecting

in detail its outstanding discovery requests.

2:09-cv-10736-AC-SDP Doc # 38 Filed 05/12/11 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 571
2

5. The Court understands that the issue in this case is plaintiff’s claim for

damages against defendant on a theory of promissory estoppel relating to the expenses

it incurred incident to its start-up for the manufacture of wood chips for defendant.

Any objections to this order shall be filed with the Court within five (5) days.

SO ORDERED.

 S/Avern Cohn 

AVERN COHN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: May 12, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to the attorneys of record

on this date, May 12, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Julie Owens 

Case Manager, (313) 234-5160

2:09-cv-10736-AC-SDP Doc # 38 Filed 05/12/11 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 572
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3990 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3990

 To encourage the formation of private sector projects to promote the 
              development of women's business enterprise.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 1996

  Mr. LaFalce (for himself, Mr. Flake, Mr. Meehan, Ms. Velazquez, Mr. 
Bentsen, Mr. Baldacci, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Ms. Millender-McDonald, 
 and Mr. Blumenauer) introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Small Business

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To encourage the formation of private sector projects to promote the 
              development of women's business enterprise.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 19(g) of 
the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 656(g)) is repealed, and subsection 
(h) is re-designated as subsection (g).
                                 <all>
```
REVOLVING LOAN NOTE


 


	Lender:  General Electric Capital Corporation	 
	Principal Amount:  $75,000,000	March 27, 2014


 


FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
the undersigned, JAKKS Pacific, Inc., a Delaware corporation, Creative Designs International, Ltd., a Delaware corporation, Disguise,
Inc., a Delaware corporation, JAKKS Sales Corporation, a Delaware corporation, Maui, Inc., an Ohio corporation, Moose Mountain
Marketing, Inc., a New Jersey corporation, and Kids Only, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (together, “Borrowers”),
hereby jointly and severally promise to pay to Lender set forth above (“Lender”) the Principal
Amount set forth above, or, if less, the aggregate unpaid principal amount of all Revolving Loans of Lender to Borrowers, together
with interest thereon at the rates specified in the Credit Agreement from the date made until such principal amount is paid in
full, payable at such times and in such amounts as are specified in the Credit Agreement.


 


Both principal and
interest are payable in Dollars to Agent at its address set forth in the Credit Agreement, in immediately available funds.


 


This Note is one of
the Notes referred to in, and is entitled to the benefits of, the Credit Agreement dated as of March 27, 2014 (as the same may
be amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “Credit Agreement”),
among Borrowers, JAKKS Pacific, Inc., as Borrower Representative, the other Credit Parties party thereto, Lenders, L/C Issuers
party thereto and General Electric Capital Corporation, as Agent for Lenders and the other Secured Parties. Capitalized terms used
herein but not defined herein have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Credit Agreement.


 


The Credit Agreement
contains provisions for acceleration of the maturity of the unpaid principal amount of this Note upon the happening of certain
stated events and also for prepayments on account of the principal hereof prior to the maturity upon the terms and conditions specified
therein.


 


This Note is a Loan
Document, is entitled to the benefits of the Loan Documents and is subject to certain provisions of the Credit Agreement, including
Sections 10.14(b) (Submission to Jurisdiction), 10.15 (Waiver of Jury Trial), 10.19
(Joint and Several) and 12.03 (Other Interpretive Provisions) thereof.


 


This Note is a registered
obligation, transferable only upon notation in the Register, and no assignment hereof shall be effective until recorded therein.


 


THIS NOTE SHALL BE
GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.


 


[signature page follows]


 




    	i



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
each Borrower has caused this Note to be executed and delivered by its duly authorized officer as of the date first set forth above.


 


	“Borrowers”	 
	 	 
	CREATIVE DESIGNS INTERNATIONAL, LTD.	 
	DISGUISE, INC.	 
	JAKKS PACIFIC, INC.	 
	JAKKS SALES CORPORATION	 
	KIDS ONLY, INC.	 
	MAUI, INC.	 
	MOOSE MOUNTAIN MARKETING, INC.	 
	 	 	 
	By:	 	 
	Name:	 	 
	Title:	 	 


 




    	ii
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Thomas F. Darden, President and Chief Executive Officer of Quicksilver Gas Services GP LLC, thegeneral partner of Quicksilver Gas Services LP, the registrant, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Quicksilver Gas Services LP;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: September 14, 2007                                /s/ Thomas F. Darden   Thomas F. Darden   President and Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32**

 

**SEMORAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION**

**(ADevelopment Stage Company)**

 

**Section 1350 Certifications**

 

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

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

The undersigned, theChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Semoran FinancialCorporation, (the “Company”), each certify that, to his or her knowledge on thedate of this certification:

 

1.              Thequarterly report of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2007 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.              Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  November 14, 2007 |
|-------------------------------|
|                          |   |
|                          |   |
| By:                           | /s Lloyd J. Weber |   |
|                          | Lloyd J. Weber |
|                          | Chief Executive Officer  and |
|                          | Principal Executive  Officer |
|                               |  |  |  |

 

 
| Date:  November 14, 2007 |
|-------------------------------|
|                          |   |
|                          |   |
| By:                           | /s/ Donald J. Bugea,  Jr. |   |
|                          | Donald J. Bugea, Jr. |
|                          | Chief Financial Officer |
|                          | Principal Financial and  Accounting Officer |
|                               |  |  |  |

 

1

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

IN RE Jeffrey S. Newton (P41537) Misc. No. 09-MC-50305

 /

ORDER OF SUSPENSION

Jeffrey S. Newton was suspended from the practice of law for a period of thirty (30) days by

the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board, effective on March 3, 2009.

Accordingly, Jeffrey S. Newton is suspended from the practice of law before the United

States District Court and the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

pursuant to E.D. Mich. LR 83.22. 

Reinstatement by the United States District Court is not reciprocal to any reinstatement

issued by any Attorney Discipline Board. Local Rule 83.22 governs reinstatement in the United

States District Court (see enclosed).

A copy of thisOrder shall be servedupon Jeffrey S. Newton by certified mail, return

receipt requested.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/ Gerald E. Rosen 

 GERALD E. ROSEN, CHIEF JUDGE 

 United States District Court 

Dated: March 19, 2009 

 Detroit, Michigan 

Case 2:09-mc-50305-GER Document 1 Filed 03/19/09 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

IN RE Jeffrey S. Newton (P41537) Misc. No. 09-MC-50305

_____________________________________________/

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

) ss

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN )

A copy of the Order of Suspension in the above-entitled cause was served upon

Jeffrey S. Newton at:

Post Office Box 2372 and 4520 Robinwood

Birmingham, MI 48012 Royal Oak, MI 48073

on this date by placing it in an envelope, certified mail, return receipt requested, and

depositing it in a United States Postal Service receptacle in Detroit, Michigan.

 s/ Patricia Foster Hommel 

 PATRICIA FOSTER HOMMEL, Deputy Clerk

 United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan 

 

Dated: March 19, 2009 

 Detroit, Michigan 

Case 2:09-mc-50305-GER Document 1 Filed 03/19/09 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KENNETH W. MORRISON, as Personal

Representative of the Estate of Mark T. 

Lowe,

Plaintiff, Case No. 09-11948

v. Hon. Nancy G. Edmunds

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF

AMERICA,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [38]

This matter has come before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s June 14, 2010

Report and Recommendation. [Docket Text # 38.] Being fully advised in the premises and

having reviewed the record and the pleadings, including Plaintiff’s objections if any, the

Court hereby ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation. It is further ordered that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is

DENIED and Defendant’s motion for judgment based on the administrative record is

GRANTED, and the case is hereby DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

s/Nancy G. Edmunds 

Nancy G. Edmunds

United States District Judge

Dated: July 29, 2010
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on July 29, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Carol A. Hemeyer 

Case Manager
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3690 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3690

   To limit the types of commercial nonpostal services which may be 
              offered by the United States Postal Service.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 20, 1996

  Mr. Hunter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To limit the types of commercial nonpostal services which may be 
              offered by the United States Postal Service.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Postal Service Core Business Act of 
1996''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds that--
            (1) the United States Postal Service is a quasi-government 
        corporation and receives certain benefits and privileges 
        pursuant to that status;
            (2) the United States Postal Service has a statutory 
        monopoly on the delivery of letters;
            (3) economic development should be promoted through small 
        business enhancement; and
            (4) the United States Postal Service has recently entered 
        into direct competition with private companies in the offering 
        of commercial nonpostal services.

SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON ACTIVITIES ALLOWABLE.

    (a) Postal Policy.--Section 101 of title 39, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(h)(1) The Postal Service may not make available to the public 
any commercial nonpostal service except if or to the extent that such 
service was made available nationwide by the Postal Service to the 
public (whether under the Domestic Mail Manual or otherwise) as of 
January 1, 1994.
    ``(2) For the purposes of this subsection, the term `commercial 
nonpostal service' includes such services as volume retail 
photocopying, packaging services (including gift-wrapping services), 
notary public services, and the sale of office supplies.
    ``(3) Nothing in this subsection shall be considered--
            ``(A) to affect any governmental function or services in 
        support of any governmental function; or
            ``(B) to be applicable to the extent contrary to statute or 
        any treaty or international agreement.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take 
effect 4 months after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0000990 19-OCT-2015 08:44 AM