alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER OF REINSTATEMENT AND WITHDRAWAL OF ABATEMENT ORDER

Appellate case name: Ismael Aguilar Alarcon v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-14-00760-CR

Trial court case number: 1225411

Trial court: 185th District Court of Harris County

We abated this case by order of February 12, 2015 due to a failure of appellant to file a 

compliant brief. A compliant brief was filed by appellant on February 12, 2015. 

Accordingly, we WITHDRAW our February 12, 2015 order of abatement and reinstate 

this case on the Court’s active docket.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: February 13, 2015
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 209 (Friday, October 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 66788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27323]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending 
Removal of Listed Property

    Pursuant to section 60.15 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being 
accepted on the following properties being considered for removal from 
the National Register of Historic Places. Comments may be forwarded by 
United States Postal Service, to the National Register of Historic 
Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St., NW., MS 2280, Washington, DC 
20240; by all other carriers, National Register of Historic Places, 
National Park Service,1201 Eye St., NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC 
20005; or by fax, 202-371-6447. Written or faxed comments should be 
submitted by November 15, 2010.
    Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

J. Paul Loether,
Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks 
Program.

    Request for REMOVAL has been made for the following resources:

INDIANA

Allen County

Haynes, John and Dorothy, House Address Restricted, Ft. Wayne, 
04000635

TEXAS

Orange County

Woodmen of the World Lodge--Phoenix Camp No. 32, 110 Border St., 
Orange, 95001551

[FR Doc. 2010-27323 Filed 10-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-51-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's unaudited financial statements for the nine months ended September 30,
1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to those financial
statements.
</LEGEND>


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          1,137,495
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   2,139,865
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                     1,273,081
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                4,987,589
<PP&E>                                            323,840
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  6,980,464
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           3,795,425
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                         9,392
<COMMON>                                           13,259
<OTHER-SE>                                      3,162,388
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    6,980,464
<SALES>                                         7,388,305
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                7,388,305
<CGS>                                           2,957,689
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   2,957,689
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,292,722)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,292,722)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,292,722)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (1.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (1.73)



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                         0000892997
<NAME>                        WNC CALIFORNIA HOUSING TAX CREDITS III, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                             486,323
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   486,323
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,472,581
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,709,456
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,472,581
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     5,264
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       64,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   218,159
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (277,834)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (277,834)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (277,834)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0




</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of
Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

I,
John E. Yetter, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Derma Sciences, Inc., hereby
certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 of
Derma Sciences, Inc. (the Form 10-Q) upon my best knowledge and belief fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Derma Sciences, Inc.

|                    |                                                                                                              | 
|------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 
|Dated: May 14, 2008 | /s/ John E. Yetter                                                                                           | 
|                    | John E. Yetter, CPA
        Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
        (Principal Financial Officer) |
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**WARREN RESOURCES, INC.**

 

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Warren Resources, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Timothy A. Larkin, Executive VicePresident, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting 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 complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

| /s/  Timothy A. Larkin |   |   |   |
|------------------------|--------|--------|--------|

TimothyA. Larkin

*ExecutiveVice President,*

*ChiefFinancial Officer*

*AndPrincipal Accounting Officer*

 

November 3,2010

 

----
II 

Calendar No. 293

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1657

To amend section 44921 of title 49, United States Code, to provide for 

the arming of cargo pilots against terrorism. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2003

Mr. BUNNING (for himself and Mrs. BOXER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read the first time 

SEPTEMBER 26, 2003

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

A BILL

To amend section 44921 of title 49, United States Code, 

to provide for the arming of cargo pilots against terrorism.

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

3 SECTION 1. ARMING CARGO PILOTS AGAINST TERRORISM. 

4 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con5 gress that members of a flight deck crew of a cargo air6 craft should be armed with a firearm and taser to defend 

7 the cargo aircraft against an attack by terrorists that 
2

•S 1657 PCS 

1 could result in the use of the aircraft as a weapon of mass 

2 destruction or for other terrorist purposes. 

3 (b) ARMING CARGO PILOTS AGAINST TERRORISM.—

4 Section 44921 of title 49, United States Code, is amend5 ed—

6 (1) in subsection (a) by striking ‘‘passenger’’ 

7 each place that it appears; 

8 (2) in subsection (k)(2) by striking ‘‘flight or,’’ 

9 and all that follows through ‘‘command’’ and insert10 ing ‘‘flight or any other flight deck crew member’’; 

11 and 

12 (3) by adding at the end of subsection (k) the 

13 following: 

14 ‘‘(3) ALL-CARGO AIR TRANSPORTATION.—In 

15 this section, the term ‘air transportation’ includes 

16 all-cargo air transportation.’’. 

17 (c) TIME FOR IMPLEMENTATION.—In carrying out 

18 the amendments made by subsection (b), the Under Sec19 retary for Border and Transportation Security of the De20 partment of Homeland Security shall ensure that pilots 

21 of both passenger and cargo aircraft are treated equitably 

22 in receiving access to training as Federal flight deck offi23 cers. 

24 (d) EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.—The requirements of 

25 subsection (c) shall have no effect on the deadlines for im-
3

•S 1657 PCS 

1 plementation contained in section 44921 of title 49, 

2 United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date 

3 of enactment of this Act. 
Calendar No. 293

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1657

A BILL

To amend section 44921 of title 49, United States 

Code, to provide for the arming of cargo pilots against terrorism. 

SEPTEMBER 26, 2003

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
#### Schuer *v.*Veeder.

*Monday, May*26.

Trespass lies for a direct and violent injury to personal property, whether the act be done intentionally or through negligence.

Case also lies for such injury if it was occasioned by the defendant’s *carelessness,*and the act was not wilfully done.

ERROR to the *Tippecanoe*Circuit Court.

*D. Mace,*for the plaintiff.

*G. S. Orth,*for the defendant.

Dewey, J.

— Case for so negligently managing the defendant’s boat, that it violently struck and sunk the plaintiff’s boat. General demurrer to the declaration sustained; and final judgment for the defendant.'

The question here raised is, whether a direct and forcible injury to property, not intentional, but the result of carelessness, may be the subject of an action on the case, or whether trespass is the only remedy?

There is no doubt that, at common law, trespass will lie for a direct and violent injury, whether inflicted through negligence, or intentionally. *Leame*v. *Bray,*3 East, 593. And, since the decision of the case of *Williams*v. *Holland,*case has also been a legal remedy for such an injury, if occasioned by *carelessness,*but not if *wilfully*done. 10 Bing. 112. See, also, *Ogle*v. *Barnes,*8 T. R. 188.—*Blin*v. *Campbell,*14 Johns. 432. The demurrer should have been overruled (1).

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.

(1)

 Vide R. S. 1843, p. *691.*—Hines *v. Kennison, May*term, 1846.
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Annual Report of Medi-Hut Co., Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-KSB for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Thomas S. Gifford, Executive Vice
      President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, do hereby
      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 §13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 15 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.




December
              21, 2006
            By:
            /s/ Thomas
              S.
              GiffordThomas
              S. GiffordExecutive
              Vice
              President,Chief
              Financial Officer andSecretary
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2113

To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to prohibit 

the comparative cost adjustment (CCA) program from operating in the 

State of Michigan. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 25, 2004

Ms. STABENOW (for herself and Mr. LEVIN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL

To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act 

to prohibit the comparative cost adjustment (CCA) program from operating in the State of Michigan.

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON OPERATION OF MEDICARE 

4 COMPARATIVE COST ADJUSTMENT (CCA) 

5 PROGRAM IN MICHIGAN. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1860C–1(b) of the Social 

7 Security Act, as added by section 241 of the Medicare Pre8 scription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 
2

•S 2113 IS 

1 2003 (Public Law 108–173), is amended by adding at the 

2 end the following: 

3 ‘‘(3) NO CCA AREAS WITHIN MICHIGAN.—A 

4 CCA area shall not include an MSA any portion of 

5 which is within the State of Michigan.’’

6 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

7 this section shall take effect as if included in the enact8 ment of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, 

9 and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–173).

Æ
No. 14,408.

#### Stoft et al. *v.*Herrell et al.

Supreme Court.— *Weight of Evidence.*— Where there is legal evidence in the record tending to support the verdict of the jury or the finding of the court on every material point, the Supreme Court will not disturb the verdict or finding on the weight of the evidence.

From the Vanderburgh Circuit Court.

*W. M. Blakey*and *R. C. Wilkinson,*for appellants.

*C. Staser, A. Gilchrist*and *C. A. De Bruler,*for appellees.

Coffey, J.

This was a proceeding instituted by the appellees before the board of commissioners of Vanderburgh county, to vacate a certain described portion of a public highway located in said county. Upon the filing of a re*479port by the viewers appointed to view said highway the appellants filed a remonstrance. Thereupon the board of commissioners appointed reviewers, two of whom reported in favor of said proposed vacation.

Filed June 25, 1890.

Upon this report an order was entered vacating the portion of the highway described in the petition, from which an appeal was taken to the Vanderburgh Circuit Court.

In that court the cause was tried by a jury, resulting in a verdict for the appellees, upon which the court, over a motion for a new trial, ’rendered judgment vacating the highway as prayed in the petition.

The error assigned here calls in question the correctness of the ruling of the circuit court in overruling the motion for a new trial.

The reasons assigned for a new trial were :

*First.*That the verdict of the jury was not supported by sufficient evidence.

*Second.*That the verdict was contrary to law.

We have carefully read the evidence, and, while'a greater number of witnesses testified on behalf of the appellants than on behalf of the appellees, we find much conflict. This court will reverse a cause on the evidence where it does not support the verdict of the jury or the finding of the court; but it will not undertake to weigh conflicting evidence with a view of ascertaining with which party the preponderance rests. *Gagg*v. *Vetter,*41 Ind. 228; *Fort Wayne, etc., R. R. Co.*v. *Husselman,*65 Ind. 73.

If there is legal evidence in the record which tends to support the verdict of the jury, or the finding of the court, on every material point, this court will not disturb the verdict or finding on the weight of the evidence. *Schofield*v. *Henderson,*67 Ind. 258; *Swales*v. *Southard,*64 Ind. 557.

The only question presented by the record before us, is the one involving the weight of the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant To

Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Michael Silton, Chief Executive Officer of Rainmaker Systems, Inc. (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 of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



/s/    MICHAEL SILTONMichael Silton Chief Executive Officer




Date: March 22, 2005
Exhibit 13.2

            CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Transition Report on Form 20-F of ART Advanced Research
Technologies Inc. for the fiscal period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jacques Bedard, Chief Financial Officer of ART Advanced Research Technologies
Inc., certify to my knowledge, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and 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 ART
Advanced Research Technologies Inc.

Date: June 28, 2004

                                                ART ADVANCED RESEARCH
                                                TECHNOLOGIES INC.

                                                (s) Jacques Bedard
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Name: Jacques Bedard
                                                Title: Chief Financial Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-41753

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN ANTONIO SANCHEZ-LOREDO,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-03-CR-689-1

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

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Antonio Sanchez-Loredo appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Sanchez-Loredo contends that the “felony” and “aggravated felony”

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. 

He therefore argues that his conviction must be reduced to one

under the lesser included offense found in 8 U.S.C. § 1362(a),

his judgment must be reformed to reflect a conviction only under

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 23, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 03-41753

-2-

that provision, and his sentence must be vacated and the case

remanded for resentencing to no more than two years’ imprisonment

and one year of supervised release. 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Sanchez-Loredo acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.