alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MR. ARTURO GUAJARDO JR.

COUNTY CLERK OF HIDALGO CO.

PO BOX 58

EDINBURG, TX 78540

RE: Case No. 15-0527 DATE: 11/6/2015

COA #: 13-12-00711-CV TC#: CL-05-1445-G

STYLE:HERIBERTO DE LA GARZA D/B/A LUDY’S ROPA USADA

v. DALIA RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, LALO

RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, MARIA

MARTINEZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, AND THE

HEIRS OF JUAN FRANCISCO MARTINEZ

Today the Supreme Court of Texas denied the motion

for rehearing of the above-referenced petition for

review.

FILE COPY
MS. AUDRA CRUZ

LAW OFFICE OF GARCIA, QUINTANILLA

& PALACIOS

5526 N 10TH ST

MCALLEN, TX 78504-2713

RE: Case No. 15-0527 DATE: 11/6/2015

COA #: 13-12-00711-CV TC#: CL-05-1445-G

STYLE:HERIBERTO DE LA GARZA D/B/A LUDY’S ROPA USADA

v. DALIA RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, LALO

RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, MARIA

MARTINEZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, AND THE

HEIRS OF JUAN FRANCISCO MARTINEZ

Today the Supreme Court of Texas denied the motion

for rehearing of the above-referenced petition for

review.

FILE COPY
MS. DORIAN E. RAMIREZ

CLERK, THIRTEENTH COURT OF

APPEALS

901 LEOPARD STREET, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX 78401

RE: Case No. 15-0527 DATE: 11/6/2015

COA #: 13-12-00711-CV TC#: CL-05-1445-G

STYLE:HERIBERTO DE LA GARZA D/B/A LUDY’S ROPA USADA

v. DALIA RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, LALO

RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, MARIA

MARTINEZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, AND THE

HEIRS OF JUAN FRANCISCO MARTINEZ

Today the Supreme Court of Texas denied the motion

for rehearing of the above-referenced petition for

review.

FILE COPY
MR. JOHN DAVID FRANZ

LAW OFFICE OF JOHN DAVID FRANZ

400 N. MCCOLL, SUITE B

MCALLEN, TX 78501

RE: Case No. 15-0527 DATE: 11/6/2015

COA #: 13-12-00711-CV TC#: CL-05-1445-G

STYLE:HERIBERTO DE LA GARZA D/B/A LUDY’S ROPA USADA

v. DALIA RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, LALO

RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, MARIA

MARTINEZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, AND THE

HEIRS OF JUAN FRANCISCO MARTINEZ

Today the Supreme Court of Texas denied the motion

for rehearing of the above-referenced petition for

review.

FILE COPY
MR. MICHAEL SHANE PARSON

LIVESAY LAW OFFICE

BRAZOS SUITE NO. 9

517 WEST NOLANA

MCALLEN, TX 78504

RE: Case No. 15-0527 DATE: 11/6/2015

COA #: 13-12-00711-CV TC#: CL-05-1445-G

STYLE:HERIBERTO DE LA GARZA D/B/A LUDY’S ROPA USADA

v. DALIA RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, LALO

RAMIREZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, MARIA

MARTINEZ D/B/A LOS BALDOS ROPA USADA, AND THE

HEIRS OF JUAN FRANCISCO MARTINEZ

Today the Supreme Court of Texas denied the motion

for rehearing of the above-referenced petition for

review.

FILE COPY
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         163,095
<SECURITIES>                                   1,000,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,173,925
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    910,389
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,575,623
<PP&E>                                         3,548,882
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,304,504
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 6,545,498
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          851,849
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       25,341
<OTHER-SE>                                     5,404,795
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   6,545,498
<SALES>                                        1,565,042
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,565,042
<CGS>                                          602,654
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  602,654
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,159,959
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             27,785
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (188,944)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,741)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (187,203)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (187,203)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.08)
        


</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-73,458]

                    By application dated September 3, 2010, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the negative determination regarding workers' eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on July 23, 2010. The Department's Notice of Determination was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on August 6, 2010 (75 FR 47635).                

The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination based on the findings that there have not been increased imports of services like or directly competitive with the financial services supplied by the subject firm, and there has not been a shift in the supply of services by the firm to a foreign country. In addition, the subject firm is not a supplier or downstream producer to a firm that employed a worker group eligible to apply for TAA.

The request for reconsideration states that “the workers at Chrysler Financial Services, Troy, Michigan were engaged in activities that initiated the need to produce automotive vehicles and automotive vehicle parts * * * multiple production facilities within the Chrysler Group has lost production due to imports which resulted in the decrease in sales” which contributed importantly to the workers' separations.

The Department has carefully reviewed the request for reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation to determine if the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

## Conclusion

After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 21st day of September 2010.

Del Min Amy Chen,

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2010-24380 Filed 9-28-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6633
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HARRY RONALD RICE, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR-90-114-C-P, CA-94-52-3-P) Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 21, 1997 Before HALL and MI CHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Harry Ronald Rice, Appellant Pro Se. James Michael Sullivan, Assistant United States Attorney, Gretchen C. F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have sixty days withinwhich to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).The district court entered its order on November 17, 1994; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on April 15, 1996. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain either an extension or areopening of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000921066
<NAME>                         Restaurant Teams International, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLRS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         48,358
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  260,243
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    14,244
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               322,845
<PP&E>                                         9,364,018
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (422,505)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 9,264,358
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          385,584
<BONDS>                                        4,543,477
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       99,969
<OTHER-SE>                                     4,235,328
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   9,264,358
<SALES>                                        673,728
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               741,474
<CGS>                                          171,644
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  359,645
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             36,849
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                173,066
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            173,066
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   173,066
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .02



</TABLE>
**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 theQuarterly Report of Metro One Telecommunications, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Timothy A. Timmins,Chief Executive Officer and Dale N. Wahl, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

          (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

|   | /s/  Timothy A. Timmins |
|--------|------------------------------|
|   | Timothy A. Timmins           |
|   | President, Chief Executive   |
|   | Officer and Director         |
|   |                         |
|   | /s/  Dale N. Wahl       |
|   | Dale N. Wahl                 |
|   | Senior Vice  President,      |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer     |

 

 

----
Filed by Bowne Pure Compliance





Exhibit 10.7




FIRST AMENDMENT TO

INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT




This First Amendment to the Indemnification Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made and entered
into effective as of December 31, 2008, by and between A. Schulman, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the “Company”), and
 _____ 

(“Indemnitee”).



WHEREAS, the Company and Indemnitee previously entered into an Indemnification Agreement; and



WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to comply with Section 409A of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, as set forth herein;



NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree to amend the Agreement as follows:



1. The Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following Section 16 to the end thereof:



16. SPECIAL RULES FOR REIMBURSEMENTS SUBJECT TO SECTION 409A. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement and solely to the extent that any payment or reimbursement of
Indemnitee’s Expenses under this Agreement (including judgments, fines and settlement amounts)
would not be exempt from the requirements of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, all of the following conditions shall apply:



(a) Indemnitee shall only be entitled to the payment or reimbursement of Expenses incurred
during the lifetime of the Indemnitee;



(b) The amount of Expenses paid or reimbursed during one taxable year of Indemnitee shall not
affect the amount of Expenses eligible for payment or reimbursement in any other taxable year of
Indemnitee;



(c) Any reimbursement shall be made on or before the last day of Indemnitee’s taxable year
following the taxable year in which the Expense was incurred; and



(d) The right to payment or reimbursement of Expenses shall not be subject to liquidation or
exchange for another benefit.


 


 









 





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Indemnitee has executed this Amendment and the Company has caused this
Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer, effective as of the date set forth above.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	A. SCHULMAN, INC.	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	Printed Name:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Its:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	INDEMNITEE	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

Printed Name:
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-16-0000377 26-SEP-2016 07:58 AM
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 28, 2014

t0324

Order 

Clerk

March 28, 2014

148201

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148201

COA: 316703

Menominee CC: 09-003280-FC

GUY A. BUCK,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 30, 2013 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
**Exhibit10.1**

**Metro OneTelecommunications, Inc.11200 Murray Scholls PlaceBeaverton, Oregon 97007**

**June 1,2006**

James M. Usdan23 NorthumberlandNashville, TN 37215

Dear Jim:

This letter will confirm our agreement that theConsulting Agreement, between you and Metro One Telecommunications, Inc. (the “Company”),dated as of October 4, 2005 (the “Consulting Agreement”), shall be amended asfollows:

1.             You hereby resign as President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company and your service in that capacity shall no longer berequired under Section 1.2 of the Consulting Agreement.  Your duties going forward during the term ofthe Consulting Agreement will consist of rendering consultation, advice andassistance to the Company in regard to all aspects of its business.

2.             Unless earlier terminated under Section 2.2, yourengagement under the Consulting Agreement shall terminate November 1,2006.  Section 2.2(e) and (f) providingfor termination on 30 days notice shall no longer be applicable.

3.             Your compensation under Section 3.1 of the ConsultingAgreement shall continue at the current rate of $14,666.67 through September 1,2006**,** at which time yourcompensation shall be reduced to a rate of $7,083.34 per month through thetermination of the Consulting Agreement.

4.             The Company’s obligation to provide or to reimburse youfor health insurance coverage will terminate on November 1, 2006.

Nothingin this letter shall affect the continued vesting of the stock options grantedpursuant to Section 3.5 of the Consulting Agreement.  Except as set forth in this letter, the termsof the Consulting Agreement will remain in full force and effect.
|                      | Very truly yours,                      |
|----------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                 |                                   |
| AGREED AND  ACCEPTED | **METRO ONE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.** |
|                 | ** **                             |
|                 | ** **                             |
| /s/ James M.  Usdan  |                                   | By: | /s/ Gary E. Henry |   |
| James M. Usdan       |                                   | Gary E. Henry |
|                 |                                   | President and CEO |
|                      |                                        |  |  |  |

 

----
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Vernon KENNEDY.

No. 2010-KK-2181.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 29, 2010.

In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 11-09-714; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2010 KW 1353.

Denied.

KNOLL, GUIDRY and CLARK, JJ., would grant.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Terrance Paul SIAS.

No. 2010-CP-2705.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 6, 2011.

In re Sias, Terence Paul; —Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 2009-2791; to *125the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 10-457.

Denied.
BRIGADIER GENERAL EMMETT FELIX YOSTEmmett Felix Yost was born in Downs, Kan., on Oct. 7, 1903. After attending Kansas State Agricultural College in Manhattan for a year, he entered the U.S. Military Academy n 1924. He graduated on June 9, 1928, and was commissioned a second lieutenant of Infantry. 
That October General Yost entered Primary Flying School at Brooks Field, Texas, and graduated from Advanced Flying School at Kelly Field, Texas, in November 1929. Assigned to the 27th Pursuit Squadron at Selfridge Field, Mich., in November 1931, he moved to Wheeler Field, Hawaii, where he became Squadron Engineering and Armament Officer. 
Ordered to Randolph Field, Texas, in August 1934, General Yost became a flying instructor and flight commander. He moved to Dallas, Texas, in June 1939, and was named Commanding Officer of the Primary Flying School. He attended the Air Corps Tactical School at Maxwell Field, Ala., from April to July 1940, and then returned to his former position. In January 1941 he was appointed Supervisor at the Arkansas Flying School, becoming Director of Flying at Perrin Field, Texas Flying School, a year later. He went to Waco, Texas, four months later as Commanding Officer of the Advanced Flying School, moving to Laughlin Field, Texas, in June 1944 as Commander of the B-26 Transition School. 
Going to Okinawa in November 1945, General Yost served with the Plans Division, 8th Air Force Headquarters. Assigned to Air Force Headquarters, Washington, D.C., two years later, he was appointed Chief of the Troop Basis Branch in the Directorate of Manpower and Organization. In April 1948 he was transferred to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence and served in with the Special Project Office, becoming Chief of the Supplemental Research Branch there in January 1951. 
The general joined the Air Defense Command on Nov. 5, 1951, and was named Inspector General of the Eastern Air Defense Force at Stewart Air Force Base, N.Y. The following July he was assigned as Inspector General of the Air Defense Command at ADC Headquarters in Colorado Springs, Colo. Moving to Andrews AFB, Md., in September 1955, the general assumed command of the 85th Air Division (Defense), ADC. On Jan. 15, 1957, he was assigned additional duty as Commander of the 85th Continental Air Defense Division, also at Andrews AFB. 
His decorations include the Legion of Merit. He is rated a command pilot. **PROMOTIONS**First lieutenant (permanent), Oct. 1, 1934; captain (permanent), June 9, 1938; major, (temporary), Feb. 1, 1941; lieutenant colonel (temporary), Jan. 5, 1942; colonel (temporary), May 9, 1942; major (permanent), June 9, 1945; colonel (permanent), April 2, 1948; brigadier general (temporary), Oct. 27, 1954. 
(Current as of January 1957)
Order entered July 5, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00307-CR

KAMAURIS JOHNSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1172084-U

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On May 17, 2016, we abated the appeal and ordered the trial court to make findings

regarding why appellant’s brief was not timely filed. On June 30, 2016, we received

appellant’s brief and an extension motion. Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeal,

we VACATE the May 17, 2016 order to the extent it requires findings.

Appellant’s June 30, 2016 motion to extend the time for filing appellant’s brief is 

GRANTED. We ORDER appellant’s brief filed as of the date of this order. 

The State’s brief shall be due THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE