alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 12, 2018

No. 04-18-00154-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF G.N.H., A CHILD,

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017PA00642

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant appeals the trial court’s termination of his parental rights. Appellant’s courtappointed attorney has filed a brief and motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. We have 

held that in parental-termination appeals, a procedure akin to Anders is necessary to best protect 

the statutory right to counsel on appeal, to provide a procedural mechanism for counsel to fulfill 

his ethical obligations, to assist the court in deciding appeals, and to provide consistent 

procedures for all indigent litigants. See In re R.R., No. 04-03-00096-CV, 2003 WL 21157944, 

at *4 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). In compliance with the procedure set out in 

Anders, appellant’s attorney has stated that he sent a letter to appellant, which explained his right 

to review the record and file a pro se brief. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2014); In re R.R., 2003 WL 21157944, at *4. In the letter to appellant, counsel stated that he had 

enclosed copies of the brief and motion to withdraw. See Kelly, 436 S.W.3d at 313; In re R.R., 

2003 WL 21157944, at *4. 

Counsel’s letter also advised appellant that if he wishes to review the appellate record, he 

must file a motion in this court within ten days of receiving counsel’s letter. Counsel also 

enclosed a form motion for this purpose. See Kelly, 436 S.W.3d at 313; In re R.R., 2003 WL 

21157944, at *4.

If appellant desires to file a pro se brief, we ORDER that he do so on or before July 2, 

2018. If appellant files a pro se brief, appellee may file a responsive brief no later than twenty 

days after the date appellant’s pro se brief is filed in this court. We ORDER the motion to 

withdraw, filed by appellant’s counsel, to be HELD IN ABEYANCE pending further order of 

the court.
_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 12th day of June, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

James R Gaudiosi, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

United States of America, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-15-02266-PHX-ROS

ORDER 

 The Court has considered the parties’ stipulated motion to dismiss (Doc. 53), and 

good cause appearing therefore, 

 IT IS ORDERED that this matter is dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear 

its own costs and fees. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion for Summary 

Judgment (Doc. 51) as moot. 

 Dated this 13th day of March, 2017. 

Honorable Roslyn O. Silver

Senior United States District Judge

 

Case 2:15-cv-02266-ROS Document 54 Filed 03/13/17 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4811 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4811

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the Federal Credit Union 
      Act to prohibit fees for using teller windows at depository 
                 institutions, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 12, 1998

 Ms. DeLauro introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the Federal Credit Union 
      Act to prohibit fees for using teller windows at depository 
                 institutions, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Depository Institution Customer 
Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. FEES FOR USING TELLER WINDOWS PROHIBITED.

    (a) Federal Deposit Insurance Act.--Section 18 of the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1828) is amended by adding at the end 
the following new subsection:
    ``(t) Prohibition on Fees for Using Teller Windows.--
            ``(1) In general.--No fee may be imposed, directly or 
        indirectly, on a customer of an insured depository institution 
        for using the services, in person, of any individual employed 
        by the depository institution at a domestic branch of the 
        institution.
            ``(2) Regulations.--Each Federal banking agency shall 
        prescribe such regulations as the agency determines to be 
        appropriate to ensure compliance by insured depository 
        institutions with the requirements of this subsection.''.
    (b) Federal Credit Union Act.--Section 205 of the Federal Credit 
Union Act (12 U.S.C. 1785) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subsection:
    ``(h) Prohibition on Fees for Using Teller Windows.--
            ``(1) In general.--No fee may be imposed, directly or 
        indirectly, on a member of an insured credit union for using 
        the services, in person, of any individual employed by the 
        credit union at an office of the credit union where deposits 
        are accepted or checks are paid or money lent.
            ``(2) Regulations.--The Board shall prescribe such 
        regulations as the Board determines to be appropriate to ensure 
        compliance by insured credit unions with the requirements of 
        this subsection.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply after the end of the 6-month period beginning on the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
MOYES SELLERS &

HENDRICKS

PHOENIX, AZ

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

00134704

MOYES SELLERS & HENDRICKS

Stephen Brower (No. 024908)

1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 1100

Phoenix, Arizona 85004

Telephone: (602) 604-2120

sbrower@law-msh.com

Attorneys for Appellee MR Capital, LLC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

In re

Donita Cole,

Debtor.

Case No. 2:15-cv-02105-SRB

Case No. 2:15-bk-07045-EPB

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Donita Cole,

Appellants,

v.

MR Capital, LLC,

Appellee.

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Stephen Brower of Moyes Sellers and 

Hendricks enters his appearance in this matter as an attorney representing the Appellee 

MR Capital, LLC.

DATED: January 2, 2016

MOYES SELLERS & HENDRICKS

By /s/ Stephen Brower

Stephen Brower

Attorneys for MR Capital, LLC

Case 2:15-cv-02105-SRB Document 7 Filed 01/02/16 Page 1 of 2
MOYES SELLERS &

HENDRICKS

PHOENIX, AZ

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

00134704

- 2 -

CERTIFCIATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 2, 2016, I electronically transmitted the attached 

document to the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System which will send 

notification of such filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to all CM/ECF 

registrants. I further certify that a copy of the attached document was delivered via email 

to:

Donita Cole

d.cole@cox.net

/s/ Stephen Brower

Case 2:15-cv-02105-SRB Document 7 Filed 01/02/16 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32


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 filing of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Remy International, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2012, with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned officers certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officer’s 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.




Date: November 2, 2012/s/ JOHN H. WEBERJohn H. Weber,President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ FRED KNECHTELFred Knechtel,Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________

NO. 09
- 15
- 00 019
- CV



### _________________
IN RE BARNETT & GARCIA, PLLC, LAWRENCE FALLI, AND TRI ED DISTRIBUTION, IN C.

________________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding

________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Barnett & Garcia, PLLC, Lawrence Falli, and Tri Ed Distribution, In c. filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the judge of the County Court at Law No. 1 of Jefferson County, Texas, to withdraw orders that r elators contend were made after the trial court lost plenary power over the case. After careful review of the petition and the mandamus record, we conclude

r elators are not entitled to mandamus relief. The real parties in interest, Wave Solutions, LLC and Brandon Luquette, filed a motion for sanctions before the trial court signed an or der of dismissal. See Travelers Ins. Co. v. Joachim , 315 S.W.3d2 860, 863 (Tex. 2010) (“ After a nonsuit, a trial court retains jurisdiction to address collateral matters, such as motions for sanctions, even when such motions are filed after the nonsuit, as well as jurisdiction over any remaining counterclaims. ”); Scott & White Mem’l Hosp. v. Schexnider , 940 S.W.2d 594, 596 (Tex. 1996) (holding that a trial court has authority to decide a motion for sanctions while it retains plenary power, even after a nonsu it is taken) . The order of dismissal , which stated that the cause was dismissed on the plaintiff’s notice of non

- suit witho ut mentioning the opposing party’s motion for sanctions, did not dispose of the motion for sanctions. See Unifund CCR Partners v. Vil la , 299 S.W.3d 92, 95

- 96 (Tex. 2009); Crites v. Collins , 284 S.W.3d 839 , 840 (Tex. 2009 ). Relators have not shown that the trial court signed orders in the case after the expiration of its plenary power. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandam us. PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM

Submitted on January 21, 2015 Opinion Delivered January 22, 2015 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 578 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 578

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect to the 
treatment of certain personal care services under the unemployment tax.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 1997

 Mrs. Mink of Hawaii introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect to the 
treatment of certain personal care services under the unemployment tax.

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

SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN PERSONAL CARE SERVICES UNDER 
              UNEMPLOYMENT TAX.

    (a) Treatment of Certain Personal Care Services.--Subsection (c) of 
section 3306 of such Code is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of 
paragraph (19), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (20) and 
inserting ``; or'', and by adding at the end thereof the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(21) services performed by an individual during any 
        period in providing personal attendance, companionship, or 
        household care services for any individual if--
                    ``(A) such services are performed in the residence 
                of such individual,
                    ``(B) during such period, the individual performing 
                such services normally performs such services for at 
                least 5 individuals in their residences, and
                    ``(C) such services are not performed by such 
                individual while in the employ of another person 
                engaged in the trade or business of providing such 
                services.''
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (2) of section 3306(c) of such 
Code is amended by inserting ``(not described in paragraph (21))'' 
after ``domestic service'' the first place it appears.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to remuneration paid in calendar quarters ending after the date 
of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR MARISA
CHRISTINA, INCORPORATED'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998
AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR THEN ENDED AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         981,329
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,073,945
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (379,581)
<INVENTORY>                                  8,600,980
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            23,177,991
<PP&E>                                       4,916,561
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,190,411)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              44,428,564
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,265,717
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        85,868
<OTHER-SE>                                  30,076,979
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                44,428,564
<SALES>                                     74,607,115
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            74,607,115
<CGS>                                       55,377,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               45,228,064
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               369,779
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             682,558
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (24,535,026)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (8,226,807)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (16,308,219)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (16,308,219)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.03)
        

</TABLE>
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 6D2 3

- 1735 Lower Tribunal No. 20 17

- C F

- 001257

_____________________________ E MERITA M APP , Appellant ,

v.
S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee

.

_____________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County

. Keith A. Carsten , Judge.
June 25, 2024

PER CURIAM

.
AFFIRMED

.
BROWNLEE and GANNAM , JJ., and LAMBERT, B.D., Associate Judge, c oncur.

Howard L. “Rex” Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Tim Bower Rodriguez , Special Assistant Public Defender , Bartow, for A ppellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Alyssa M. Williams, Assistant Attorney General , Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
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.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - 40 CFR Part 98

### CFR Correction

In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 96 to 99, revised as of July 1, 2013, on page 765, in § 98.226, paragraph (c) is reinstated to read as follows:

§ 98.226

* * * * *

(c) Annual nitric acid production from each nitric acid train (tons, 100 percent acid basis).

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2014-25390 Filed 10-23-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
##### 



CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 302
Of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Virbac Corporation; and2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report.
 Date: April 28, 2006
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Erik R. MartinezErik R. Martinez
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.2


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 Quarterly Report of eMagin Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q /A for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Paul Campbell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 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.





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.





Dated:  October 7, 2011
By:
/s/ Paul CampbellPaul CampbellChief Financial Officer(Chief Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 1 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 2 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 3 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 4 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 5 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 6 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 7 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 8 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 9 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 10 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 11 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 12 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 13 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 14 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 15 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 16 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 17 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 18 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 19 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 20 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 21 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 22 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 23 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 24 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 25 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 26 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 27 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 28 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 29 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 30 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 31 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 32 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 33 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 34 of 35
Case 2:98-cv-00060-RCB Document 1-1 Filed 01/12/98 Page 35 of 35
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                  In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of King
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. I, Jefferson J. Gregory, Chief Executive Officer of King
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., certify, 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 contained in this report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         King Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

                                               /s/ Jefferson J. Gregory
Date: August 14, 2003                          ------------------------------
                                                 Jefferson J. Gregory
                                                 Chairman of the Board
                                                 and Chief Executive Officer