alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NUMBER 13-22-00149-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

 

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF TAHNEE ANN MCQUEEN 

AND MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER MCQUEEN AND IN THE INTEREST OF 

A.J.M AND N.A.M, CHILDREN

 

On appeal from the 414th District Court

of McLennan County, Texas.

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina

This cause is before the Court on its own motion.1 On March 21, 2022, appellant

Tahnee Ann McQueen filed a pro se notice of appeal regarding a final decree of divorce

signed in trial court cause number 2021-1959-5 in the 414th District Court of McLennan 

County, Texas. On May 3, 2022, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that her brief 

1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Tenth Court of Appeals in Waco pursuant to a 

docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 73.001.
2

had not been timely filed. The Clerk advised appellant that the appeal would be dismissed 

for want of prosecution unless, within ten days from the date of this letter, appellant 

reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not significantly injured by the 

appellant’s failure to timely file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a). Appellant did not 

respond to the Clerk’s notice or file a brief in this matter.

Appellate courts possess the authority to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution 

when an appellant in a civil case fails to timely file the appellant’s brief and gives no 

reasonable explanation for the failure. See id. R. 38.8(a)(1); id. R. 42.3(b); Am. Bail Bonds 

v. City of El Paso, 225 S.W.3d 612, 612 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2006, no pet.); Newman v. 

Clark, 113 S.W.3d 622, 623 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.) (per curiam). Similarly, 

courts may dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution generally or because the appellant 

has failed to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules, a court order, or a notice 

from the appellate court clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3 (b), (c). 

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file and 

appellant’s failure to file a brief, is of the opinion that this appeal should be dismissed. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See id. R. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), 

(c).

JAIME TIJERINA

Justice

Delivered and filed on the

7th day of July, 2022.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6119

KENNETH DARNIEL SWEETING,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of 

Corrections,

Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District 

Judge. (2:09-cv-00252-JBF-TEM)

Submitted: June 17, 2010 Decided: June 25, 2010

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Darniel Sweeting, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Darniel Sweeting seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate 

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record 

and conclude that Sweeting has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
3

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
*Release Date: June 30, 2008*

*Other formats:*
ASCII (2 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (2 KB)

----

```
B.3. Net Charge-offs of Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks
```

| Year | Estimated volume (billions of dollars) | Share of outstanding farm production loans (percent) |
|------|----------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
||
| 93   | 6                                      | 19                                                   | 19 | 50 | .230 | .014 | .049 | .045 | .112 |
| 87   | 4                                      | 15                                                   | 24 | 45 | .198 | .008 | .036 | .051 | .095 |
| 126  | 18                                     | 37                                                   | 35 | 36 | .280 | .040 | .086 | .078 | .080 |
| 108  | 11                                     | 17                                                   | 34 | 45 | .259 | .027 | .041 | .075 | .098 |
| 308  | 67                                     | 53                                                   | 140 | 48 | .656 | .142 | .118 | .294 | .101 |
| 221  | 40                                     | 50                                                   | 58 | 73 | .471 | .085 | .114 | .124 | .157 |
| 175  | 34                                     | 35                                                   | 48 | 58 | .382 | .074 | .080 | .108 | .128 |
| 129  | 28                                     | 17                                                   | 46 | 38 | .284 | .062 | .039 | .099 | .081 |
| 59   | 8                                      | 16                                                   | 12 | 24 | .124 | .017 | .035 | .026 | .048 |
| 73   | 9                                      | 7                                                    | 23 | 34 | .146 | .018 | .015 | .045 | .064 |
| 90   | 8                                      | 13                                                   | 23 | 47 | .170 | .014 | .025 | .042 | .085 |
| n.a. | 12                                     | n.a.                                                 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | .022 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
```
   Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Reported
amounts are adjusted to exclude foreign results for large banks that
report farm net charge-offs on a consolidated basis and for small banks
that are allowed to report net charge-offs according to their internal
definition of agricultural loans. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.
   n.a. Not available.
```

*Other formats:*
ASCII (2 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (2 KB)

Statistical releases

----

HomeEconomic research and dataAccessibilityContact Us
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 02-CV-0311-RPM-BNB

CLIMAX MOLYBDENUM COMPANY,

a Delaware Corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

MOLYCHEM, L.L.C.,

an Illinois Limited Liability Company,

Defendant.

vs.

CLIMAX MOLYBDENUM COMPANY and

PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION,

Counterclaim Defendants.

______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER

______________________________________________________________________________

The Motion of Climax Molybdenum Company and Phelps Dodge Corporation to Seal

Expert Report, having been duly considered, it is hereby ORDERED:

Plaintiff’s Motion to seal Exhibits A, B and C to Climax Molybdenum Company’s and

Phelps Dodge Corporation’s Motion to Strike Numerous Expert Reports of Molychem LLC

Served more than 30 Days After the Deadline for Completion of All Expert Reports, is

GRANTED.

Dated: February 5th , 2007. s/Richard P. Matsch

_________________________

Richard P. Matsch,

United States District Court Judge

Case 1:02-cv-00311-RPM Document 193 Filed 02/05/07 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Oliver Hooper

v. Civil No. 08-cv-426-JD

Warden, Northern New Hampshire

Correctional Facility

O R D E R

After his retained counsel withdrew, Oliver Hooper filed a

motion to have counsel appointed to represent him in his habeas

corpus proceeding. On October 5, 2009, the court provided Hooper

with the forms necessary to show a financial need for appointed

counsel. Hooper has filed a letter explaining his efforts to

complete the forms. 

To avoid a prolonged delay, Hooper shall file the completed

forms, a motion for an extension of time, or a notice that he

intends to proceed pro se on or before November 16, 2009. If

Hooper fails to do so, the case may be dismissed.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

October 27, 2009

cc: Oliver Hooper, pro se

Elizabeth C. Woodcock, Esquire

Case 1:08-cv-00426-JD Document 23 Filed 10/27/09 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-355-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. WAUNITA WEINGART,

2. JOHN PHILLIP GALLEGOS,

3. ALOIS CRAIG WEINGART,

Defendants.

NOTICE OF MATERIAL TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN GOVERNMENT’S

PROFFER RELATING TO THE METHODOLOGY USED BY WITNESS DANA

CHAMBERLIN AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW (Doc. #161)

The United States of America, by Assistant Untied States Attorney, Linda

Kaufman, hereby gives notice to the Court and counsel of its discovery of two material

typographical errors in the Government’s Proffer Relating to the Methodology Used by

Witness Dana Chamberlin and Memorandum of Law (Doc.#161), as follows:

1. At Page 12 the last sentence in the only full paragraph states, “key

documents relating to Opinion #A27(k) appear in Attachment 5 hereto.” That sentence

should state, “key documents relating to Opinion #A28(k) appear in Attachment 5

hereto”

2. At Page 21, the last sentence in the only full paragraph states, “key

documents relating to her Opinion #C1389 appear at Attachment 8 hereto.” That

1

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 165 filed 10/26/12 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 3
sentence should state, “key documents relating to her Opinion #C1388 appear at

Attachment 8 hereto.”

3. The undersigned apologizes for any confusion these errors may have caused.

Respectfully submitted this 26 day of October, 2012. th

JOHN F. WALSH

United States Attorney

By: s/ Linda Kaufman 

Linda Kaufman

Assistant United States Attorney

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700

Denver, Colorado 80202

Telephone: (303) 454-0100

Facsimile: (303) 454-0404

E-mail: Linda.Kaufman@usdoj.gov

2

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 165 filed 10/26/12 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this 17 day of October, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing th

with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of

such filing to the following e-mail addresses:

Martin Adam Stuart

E-mail: martinstuartlaw@solucian.com

Darlene Ann Bagley

E-mail: bagley@ridleylaw.com

William Lewis Taylor

E-mail: wltaylorpc@gmail.com

Paula M. Ray

E-mail: paulamray@earthlnk.net

 

By: s/ Deborah SIsung 

DEBORAH SISUNG

Legal Assistant to AUSA Linda Kaufman

United States Attorney’s Office

1225 - 17 Street, Suite 700 th

Denver, CO 80202

Telephone: (303) 454-0244

Fax: (303) 454-0402

E-mail: deborah.sisung@usdoj.gov

3

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 165 filed 10/26/12 USDC Colorado pg 3 of 3
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Campbell Resources Inc. (the
Corporation) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Andre Y. Fortier, Chief 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, to 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/ Andre Y. Fortier

Andre Y. Fortier
Chief Executive Officer
May 15, 2003
Exhibit 15.4

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in
the Registration Statements on Form F-3 (No. 333-180880) and Form S-8 (No. 333-161683, 333-161684, 333-167643 and 333-196453) of Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson of our report dated June 19, 2014 relating to the consolidated financial statements
of ST-Ericsson SA, which appears under Exhibit 15.2 in this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 20-F/A.

PricewaterhouseCoopers
SA



|                 |  |  |  |                |  | 
|---------------- |  |  |  | -------------- |  | 
|/s/ Claudia Benz |  |  |  | /s/ Mike Foley |  | 
|Claudia Benz     |  |  |  | Mike Foley     |  | 

Geneva, Switzerland

June 19, 2014
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIR E

United States of America

V .

Cong Duc Nguyen

Criminal No . 08-cr-152-01-JD

O R D E R

The assented to motion to reschedule jury trial (document no .

9) filed by defendant is granted in part - Trial is rescheduled to

March 17, 2009 .

Defendant shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights within

10 days . The court finds that the ends of justice served by

granting a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public

and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U .S .C . §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), for the reasons set forth in the motion .

SO ORDERED .

/s/ Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

United States District Judge

Date : January 29, 200 9

cc : Michael Sheehan, Esq .

Jennifer Davis, Esq .

U .S . Marsha l

U .S . Probation

Case 1:08-cr-00152-JD Document 10 Filed 01/29/09 Page 1 of 1
#### In the Matter of Munro S. Kagno, Respondent, v Deb Kagno, Appellant.

[745 NYS2d 458]

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (DePhillips, J.), dated June 29, 2000, which denied her objections to an order of the same court (Blaustein, H.E.), dated January 25, 2000, which, upon denying her application for an adjournment, and upon her default in appearing, inter alia, dismissed her motion to restore a motion made in 1990 to the calendar and for discovery.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the mother’s contentions, the Family Court properly determined that the Hearing Examiner providently exercised her discretion in denying the request for a further adjournment of the hearing on her motion to restore a prior application to the calendar and in dismissing that motion upon her default. A request for an adjournment is addressed to the *411sound discretion of the court, and its determination will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion *(see Wolosin v Campo,*256 AD2d 332). Santucci, J.P., Altman, S. Miller and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Case 1:08-cv-00238-JL   Document 1   Filed 06/12/08   Page 1 of 5

Case 1:08-cv-00238-JL   Document 1   Filed 06/12/08   Page 2 of 5

Case 1:08-cv-00238-JL   Document 1   Filed 06/12/08   Page 3 of 5

Case 1:08-cv-00238-JL   Document 1   Filed 06/12/08   Page 4 of 5

Case 1:08-cv-00238-JL   Document 1   Filed 06/12/08   Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT 32.2

I, John Lackland, Chief Financial Officer of Power Efficiency Corporation, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 15, 2006



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|    | 
|BY: |  | /s/ John Lackland                    
|    |  | John Lackland Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of a separate disclosure document.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 21

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                            Subsidiaries of the Registrant
                          ----------------------------------


                                                               Percentage
                                                                of Voting
                                                               Securities
                                                 State of       Owned By
                                               Incorporation   Registrant
                                               -------------   ----------

<S>                                            <C>             <C>
Compupower Corporation                            Delaware         100%

Value Line Securities, Inc.                       New York         100%

The Vanderbilt Advertising Agency, Inc.           New York         100%

Value Line Publishing, Inc.                       New York         100%

Value Line Distribution Center, Inc.              New Jersey       100%

</TABLE>
H. Res. 9

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 4, 2007.

Resolved, That pursuant to the Legislative Pay Act of 

1929, as amended, the six minority employees authorized 

therein shall be the following named persons, effective January 3, 2007, until otherwise ordered by the House, to-wit: JoMarie St. Martin, Mike Sommers, Dave Schnittger, Brian 

Kennedy, George Rogers, and Jay Cranford, each to receive 

gross compensation pursuant to the provisions of House Resolution 119, Ninety-fifth Congress, as enacted into permanent law by section 115 of Public Law 95–94. In addition, 

the Minority Leader may appoint and set the annual rate of 

pay for up to three further minority employees. 

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                                  CALTON, INC.
     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

     In connection with the annual report of Calton, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Vicky
F. Savage, Acting 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
     the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: March 14, 2007                 By: /s/ Vicky F. Savage
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Vicky F. Savage
                                          ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                          (PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING
                                          OFFICER)
Exhibit 32

Certification Pursuant To18
U.S.C. Section 1350,As Adopted Pursuant ToSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of
West Coast Bancorp (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December
31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), the undersigned 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 condition
      and results of operations of the Company.
|   

|/s/ Robert D. Sznewajs                |  |                                                      |  | /s/ Anders Giltvedt |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------- |  | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|March 5, 2008                         |  | March 5, 2008                                       

98

---
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2199

To amend the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997 to permit any Federal law enforcement agency to

enter into a cooperative agreement with the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia to assist the Department in carrying

out crime prevention and law enforcement activities in the District of

Columbia if deemed appropriate by the Chief of the Department and

the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, and for other

purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 14, 2001

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Government Reform

A BILL

To amend the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997 to permit any Federal

law enforcement agency to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Metropolitan Police Department of the

District of Columbia to assist the Department in carrying out crime prevention and law enforcement activities

in the District of Columbia if deemed appropriate by

the Chief of the Department and the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
2

•HR 2199 IH

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘District of Columbia

5 Police Coordination Amendment Act of 2001’’.

6 SEC. 2. PERMITTING ADDITIONAL FEDERAL LAW ENFORCE7 MENT AGENCIES TO ENTER INTO COOPERA8 TIVE AGREEMENTS WITH METROPOLITAN

9 POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF

10 COLUMBIA.

11 Section 11712(d) of the National Capital Revitaliza12 tion and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997 (D.C.

13 Code, sec. 4–192(d)) is amended by adding at the end the

14 following:

15 ‘‘(33) Any other law enforcement agency of the

16 Federal government that the Chief of the Metropoli17 tan Police Department and the United States Attor18 ney for the District of Columbia deem appropriate to

19 enter into an agreement pursuant to this section.’’.

Æ