alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### John Poindexter, Admr., *v.*Thos. T. Garnett.

Frauds, Statute of — Contract Not to be Performed Within a Year.

A contract by a party to build -a fence in consideration of permission by plaintiff to defendant to lay and use a iswitch on plaintiff’s land, was held not to be a contract which was not to be performed within one year.

APPEAL PROM HARRISON CIRCUIT COURT.

December 14, 1872.

Opinion by

Judge Hardin :

The evidence in this case, which we regard as amply sufficient to establish the alleged agreements of Poindexter to build the *108fence, in consideration of the assent and permission of the appellee to the putting down and using of the switch upon his land, does not necessarily impart a promise which was not to be performed within one year, but an undertaking which ought, at least, to have been complied with when the right of way was granted; and it does not appear that it was contemplated by the parties, when they made the contract, that its performance should be deferred on either side for over one year; nor dó we think the obligation to make the fence failed for want of consideration. The privilege of using the switch carried with it, so far as was necessary and indispensable to that use, the right of ingress and egress, and Poindexter himself seems to have considered the benefit, thus secured to him a fair equivalent for his undertaking to make the fence.

*A. H. Ward, for appellant.*

*Trimble, for appellee.*

The evidence and agreed statement of facts seem to sustain the allowance made by the commissioner, and the judgment confirming it.

Therefore the judgment is *affirmed.*
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

               SUBSIDIARIES OF BAYARD DRILLING TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Bayard Drilling, L.L.C.
Bayard Drilling, L.P.
Bonray Drilling Corporation
Trend Drilling Co.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-50685

c/w No. 12-50689

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE FRIAS-RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:11-CR-2096-1 

USDC No. 2:12-CR-66-1

Before KING, CLEMENT, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Frias-Rodriguez (Frias) pleaded guilty to being found unlawfully in

the United States and was sentenced to a guideline range term of imprisonment

of 21 months to be followed by a three-year term of supervised release. The

district court also revoked Frias’s term of supervised release on a prior

conviction and imposed a sentence at the top of the advisory range of 18 months,

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 29, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 12-50685 Document: 00512223768 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/29/2013
No. 12-50685

c/w No. 12-50689

to run consecutively to the illegal reentry sentence. Frias is appealing from the

imposition of the consecutive revocation sentence, arguing that it was not

reasonable because the stacked sentence was greater than necessary to meet the

objectives of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Frias contends that review of his revocation sentence should be for

reasonableness. Because Frias failed to object to the reasonableness of his

revocation sentence, we need not reach any dispute over standards of review

because this court’s review is for plain error. See United States v. Whitelaw, 580

F.3d 256, 259-60 (5th Cir. 2009); Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135

(2009). Frias argues that the imposition of the consecutive sentence was plainly

unreasonable because it was greater than necessary to achieve the goals of the

sentencing factors in § 3553(a). 

The imposition of the consecutive revocation sentence is authorized by

statute and preferred under the Guidelines. See 18 U.S.C. § 3584; U.S.S.G.

§ 7B1.3(f), p.s., & comment. (n.4). The district court’s comments at sentencing

reflect that it had considered the permissible § 3553(a) factors in determining

that the consecutive 18-month revocation sentence, which was within the

advisory range, was an appropriate and reasonable sentence. Frias has failed

to show that the district court, in determining that the revocation sentence

should run consecutively to the sentence for the new offense, committed any

error, plain or otherwise. See Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135.

Frias has not challenged his illegal reentry conviction or the sentence

imposed for that offense. Thus, he has abandoned any claims arising out of that

conviction or sentence. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993)

The convictions and sentences in both of the appeals are AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 12-50685 Document: 00512223768 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/29/2013
#### BOARD OF MANAGERS, Yardarm Beach Condominium II, Richard Kreindler, Charles Miller and Edward Stephenson, individually and on behalf on all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The VILLAGE OF WESTHAMPTON BEACH and Frederick M. Showers, individually and as Building & Zoning Administrator for the Village of Westhampton Beach, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 00-9379.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 30, 2001.

E. Christopher Murray, Reisman, Peirez & Reisman, L.L.P., Garden City, NY; Marybeth Malloy, on the brief, for appellants.

Michael A. Miranda, Miranda & Sokoloff, LLP, New York, NY, for appellees.

Present JACOBS and LEVAL, Circuit Judges, MURTHA, District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable J. Garvan Murtha, of the United States District Court for the District of Vermont, sitting by designation.

*SUMMARY ORDER*

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be, and it hereby is, AFFIRMED.

*29Appellants appeal from Judge Seybert’s order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment on their claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Village of Westhampton and its Building *&*Zoning Administrator. We affirm for substantially the reasons stated by Judge Seybert in her Memorandum and Order. *See Board of Managers v. Village of Westhampton Beach,*No. 98-CV-0476 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 2000).
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.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

# AGENCY:

United States Commission on Civil Rights.

# ACTION:

Notice of Commission Business Meeting.

# DATES:

*Date and Time:*                         Friday, December 12, 2014; 9:30 a.m. EST.                    

# ADDRESSES:

*Place:*                         1331 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Suite 1150, Washington, DC.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376-8591.

                        Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the briefing and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pamela Dunston at (202) 376-8105 or at                         *signlanguage@usccr.gov*                         at least seven business days before the scheduled date of the meeting.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Meeting Agenda

This meeting is open to the public.

I. Approval of Agenda

II. Program Planning
    - Review and Vote of the 2015 Statutory Enforcement Report Discovery Plan
    - Discussion and Vote on Updating Select Commission Reports

III. Management and Operations
    - Presentations from the Illinois and Georgia SAC Chairs on their Immigration Projects
    - Staff Director's Report

IV. State Advisory Committee (SAC) Appointments
    - Indiana

V. Adjourn Meeting

Dated: December 2, 2014.

Marlene Sallo,

Staff Director.

[FR Doc. 2014-28649 Filed 12-3-14; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Anthony E. Applebaum, Chief Executive Officer of Mera Pharmaceuticals,
certify that (1) Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 3 (a) or
15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained
in the Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2003 fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations
of Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.







/S/ANTHONY E. APPLEBAUM
------------------------------------------
Anthony E. Applebaum
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer

March 15, 2004


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Mera
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.




<PAGE>
This decision of the New Mexico Court of Appeals was not selected for publication in

the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12

- 405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer

generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Court of Appeals.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
No. A
- 1
- CA
- 41139 LAZARO LLANES,
Plaintiff

- App ellant,

v. LARRY H. MILLER CASA CHRYSLER,
Defendant

- Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY Daniel E. Ramczyk, District Court Judge

Lazaro Llanes Albuquerque, NM Pro Se Appellant
Snell & Wilmer LLP Todd E. Rinner Albuquerque, NM
for Appellee
MEMORANDUM OPINION YOHALEM, Judge. {1} Plaintiff, a self

- represented litigant, appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant. In this Court’s notice of proposed disposition, we proposed to summarily affirm. Plai ntiff filed a memorandum in opposition, and Defendant filed a memorandum in support, both of which we have duly considered. Remaining unpersuaded by Plaintiff’s memorandum in opposition, we affirm. {2} In his memorandum in opposition, Plaintiff maintains that the district court erred in granting summary judgment. [MIO 1

- 2] Plaintiff has failed , however, to assert anynew facts, law, or argument that persuade this Court that our notice of proposed

disposition was erroneous. See Hennessy v. Duryea , 1998

- NMCA

- 036, ¶ 24, 124 N.M. 754, 955 P.2d 683 (“Our courts have repeatedly held that, in summary calendar cases, the burden is on the party opposing the proposed disposition to clearly point out errors in fact or law.”); State v. Mondragon , 1988

- NMCA

- 027, ¶ 10, 1 07 N.M. 421, 759 P.2d 1003 (stating that “[a] party responding to a summary calendar notice must come forward and specifically point out errors of law and fact,” and the repetition of earlier arguments does not fulfill this requirement), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in State v. Harris , 2013

- NMCA

- 031, ¶ 3, 297 P.3d 374. We therefore refer Plaintiff to our analysis contained therein. {3} Accordingly, for the reasons stated in our notice of proposed disposition and her ein, we affirm. {4} IT IS SO ORDERED. JANE B. YOHALEM, Judge
WE CONCUR: SHAMMARA H. HENDERSON, Judge KATHERINE A. WRAY, Judge
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



In connection with the Annual Report of Millipore Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned, Martin D. Madaus, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Kathleen B. Allen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his or her 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/ Martin D.
Madaus                        * 
|Martin D. Madaus                              
|President and Chief Executive Officer         
|March 16, 2005                                
|                                              
|/s/ Kathleen B.
Allen                        *
|Kathleen B. Allen                             
|Vice President and Chief Financial Officer    
|March 16, 2005                                

---

|* | - A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Millipore Corporation and will be retained by Millipore Corporation and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A

A

A

A

A A

A

A A A

A A A

A A A

A

Y W A

A A A

A

w Y w Y

Y A A A

A WA A

A Y A A
A A A

A

A
A Y W

w

A

Y A

A

w

w

A

A Y

w

A

A Y w

A w

WA Y

W A

w
A

w w

w w

w w

w w w

W

w W w

W w

w

w W

A

w

w w

Y Y W

w

WA Y w w

w w w
w

w w

w

w W

w

w

w w w w

w w

w w

A

w A

A Y Y W

w

w w

w

W w
WA

WA w

w

w

w

A

w w

w w

w w

w w

w

w w w

A w

Y w

Y w

w

w
w

w w

w

w

w

w

A

A

WA Y w w

WA

w A

w A

A A

WA Y
w

w w w

w

w w

w w

w

w w w

WA

Y

WA

w

w

w

WA

A Y w w

w w
A Y Y

w w

w w

W

W w w

w w

w

w

w

A

w

A

A

A

w w

w

w

w A
w A

WA

A

A

A W

w

A

Y Y

A Y A
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas August 11, 2021 No. 04-21-00272-CR The STATE of Texas, Appellant
v. Marco Antonio GLORIA , Appellee From the 365th Judicial District Court, Maverick County, Texas

Trial Court No. 19-02-07981-MCRAJA Honorable Amado J. Abascal, III, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R On August 10, 2021, appellee filed a Motion to Substitute Appellate Counsel. After consideration, appellee’s motion is GRANTED . We ORDER the clerk of this court to update the records of this case to show Clay Dean Thomas as attorney of record for appellee.

_________________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 11th day of August, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (IAC) MEETING

AGENDA

June 6th, 2023

Location: District Ballroom Mayflower Hotel Washington, DC

MEETING GOALS: 

• Provide an update on the CHIPS Act Implementation

• Receive recommendations from the IAC working groups

• Allow the Committee to deliberate and discuss the progress that has been made

June 6, 2023

Time (ET) Topic Discussion Leader

9:30 am to 9:35 am Call to Order Roll 

Call

Ben Davis

IAC Designated Federal Officer

NIST

Tamiko Ford

IAC Designated Federal Officer

NIST

9:35 am to 9:45 am Welcome Opening

Remarks

Michael Splinter

IAC Chair

General Partner

MRS Business and Technology Advisors

Susan Feindt 

IAC Vice-Chair 

Fellow

Analog Devices Inc.

9:45 am to 9:55 am Welcome Remarks Laurie Locascio

Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Standards and Technology

NIST

9:55 am to 10:20 am CHIPS R&D Update Eric Lin

Interim CHIPS R&D Director

NIST

Marla Dowell

CHIPS Metrology Director

NIST

10:20 am to 10:40 am 

CHIPS Act and National Microelectronics 

Strategy Presentation

Lisa E. Friedersdorf

Assistant Director for Microelectronics, 

Materials, and Critical Minerals

Office of Science and Technology Policy

White House

 10:40 am to 11:00 am

Microelectronics Programs and

Intra-agency Coordination Presentation

• DoD Presentation

• DoE Presentation

Alison Smith

Microelectronics Commons Technical 

Director

Office Of the Under Secretary of Defense for

Research and Engineering

Barry Johnson 

Division Director, Division of Translational 

Impacts

National Science Foundation

Andrew Schwartz 

Division Director, Material Sciences and 

Engineering Division 

Basic Energy Sciences

Office of Science

Department of Energy 
 11:00 pm to 12:00 pm

Government Roundtable Lisa E. Friedersdorf

Alison Smith 

Barry Johnson 

Andrew Schwartz

Eric Lin

Christie Canaria

CHIPS R&D Program Manager

NIST

12:15 pm to 1:00 pm

Lunch Ben Davis

1:00 pm to 1:15 pm

DOC Remarks Gina Raimondo

Secretary of Commerce

DOC

1:15 pm to 1:45 pm Sequencing Working Group Report Out and 

Discussion Presentation

Willy Shih

Sequencing Working Group Chair

Harvard Business School

 1:45 pm to 2:30 pm Organizational and PPP Working Group 

Report Out and Discussion Presentation

Deirdre Hanford

Organizational and Public & Private

Partnerships Working Group Chair

Synopsys

 2:30 pm to 2:45 pm

Break Ben Davis

 2:45 pm to 3:30 pm

R&D Workforce Working Group Report 

Out and Discussion Presentation

Tsu-Jae King Liu

Workforce Working Group Chair

University of California Berkeley

3:30 pm to 4:15 pm

R&D Gaps Working Group Report Out 

and Discussion Presentation

Dan Armbrust

R&D Working Group Chair

Silicon Catalyst

 4:15 pm to 4:25 pm Public Comment Period Ben Davis

 4:25 pm to 4:30 pm Summary Remarks and Next Steps Laurie Locascio

 4:30 pm Adjourn Ben Davis
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk March 24, 2010

0317 

# Order

March 24, 2010

140071

THOMAS JANSON, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140071 COA: 284607 Wayne CC: 06-622578-NO SAJEWSKI FUNERAL HOME, INC., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the August 25, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consider ed. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral argument on whether to grant the applicati on or take other peremptory action. MCR 7.302(H)(1). The parties may file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order, but they should not submit mere re statements of their application papers.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4405

To suspend temporarily the duty on Methylene Bis-Benzotriazolyl 

Tetramethylbutylphenol. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2004

Mrs. MYRICK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on Methylene BisBenzotriazolyl Tetramethylbutylphenol.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.01.04 Methylene Bis-Benzotriazolyl 

Tetramethylbutylphenol 

(CAS No.103597–45–1) 

(provided for in subheading 

3824.90.28) ......................... Free Free No change On or before 

12/31/07 ’’. 
2

•HR 4405 IH 

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

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                        915,168
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               915,168
<CGS>                                           43,653
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,653
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               871,523
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>