alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The County of Guadalupe,



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

October 21, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00497

- CV

David GOAD

, Appellant

v.

THE COUNTY OF GUADALUPE , Texas, Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas
Trial Court No. 12

- 1923

- CV William Old, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On July 7, 2014 , appellant filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s June 4, 2014 judgment. 1 On September 30 , 2014 , appellant filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs in this

court. It appears appellant did not file his affidavit in the trial court.

A party who cannot pay the costs of an appeal must file an affidavit of indigence “in the trial court with or before the notice of appeal.” T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1(c)(1). Appellant’s aff idavit
was therefore due in the trial court on July 7 , 2014 , the date his notice of appeal was filed, or a motion for extension of time to file the affidavit was due in this court fifteen days later, on July

22 , 2014

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1(c)(1), (3).

We construe d the affidavit filed in this court as a motion for extension of time to file the
affidavit in the trial court. Although the affidavit was filed outside the fifteen

- day deadline set forth in Rule 20.1(3), we noted that an untimely affidavit of indigence can be “adequate to fulfill the fundamental purpose of Rule 20.1.” Higgins v. Randall County Sheriff’s Office , 257 S.W.3d 684 (Tex. 2008). Accordingly, we granted the motion to extend time to file an affidavit of
inabil ity to pay costs and ordered the clerk of this court to send copies of the affidavit and this
order to the district clerk, the court reporter, and all parties. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1(d)(2). We further ordered that any contest to the affidavit of indige nce had to be filed in this court on or before October 13, 2014. As of the date of this order, no contest was filed.

1 This is the date the notice of appeal was filed in the trial court . The notice of appeal was not forwarded to this

court un til July 16, 2014. The date of the judgment is based on a statement in the notice of appeal

– the clerk’s record has not yet been filed.Accordingly, we find appellant is indigent. Because appellant is indigent, the district
clerk must file the clerk’s record without re quiring payment from appellant. Accordingly, we
ORDER the district clerk to file the clerk’s record in this court without cost to appellant on or
before November 20, 2014

.

We order the clerk of this court to serve copies of this orde r on appellant, all counsel,
and the district clerk.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
court on this 21st day of October, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle
Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTant**

I consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form 10-K/A of CYIOS Corporation of my report dated February 23, 2010 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of CYIOS Corporation included in its Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 15, 2011.

|                                          |
|------------------------------------------|
|                                          |
| */s/*                                    |
| Jewett, Schwartz, Wolfe & Associates |
| Florida

October 25, 2011                |
#### Jacqueline A. CRAWFORD and Nancy L. Emerson, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Appellees, v. William JANKLOW, Governor of the State of South Dakota and James Ellenbecker, Secretary of the South Dakota Department of Social Services and the Agents, Employees, and Successors of the above, Appellants.

No. 84-2277.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 1985.

Decided June 7, 1985.

Janice Godtland, Pierre, S.D., for appellants.

Mark Falk, Rapid City, S.D., for appellees.

Before HEANEY, Circuit Judge, FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge, and McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge.

HEANEY, Circuit Judge.

We are called upon for the fourth time to consider whether the South Dakota’s method of distributing federal funds through its Low Income Energy Assistance Program (LIEAP) violates the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (LIHEAA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 8621-8629. *See Clifford v. Janklow,*733 F.2d 534 (8th Cir.1984); *Crawford v. Janklow, (Crawford II),*733 F.2d 541 (8th Cir.1984); *Crawford v. Janklow (Crawford I),*710 F.2d 1321 (8th Cir.1983).

The last time this matter was before our Court, we held that the State’s LIEAP program for the 1983-84 heating season violated both 42 U.S.C. § 8624(f) and § 8624(b)(5), because it reduced the LIEAP benefits for persons receiving a Section 8 housing allowance, and did not pay the highest level of assistance to class members who had the highest energy costs in relation to income. *Clifford,*733 F.2d at 537-40. The same day, we also ruled that the district court improperly dismissed the plaintiff class’s objections to the State’s revised plan for the 1982-83 heating season for lack of jurisdiction. *Crawford II,*733 F.2d at 542-43. We remanded to the district court to consider the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims in light of our opinion in *Clifford.*

On remand, the district court held in a thorough and well-reasoned opinion that the State’s revised plan unlawfully excluded class members in whole or in part from LIEAP benefits. The State now brings this appeal, arguing that the district court’s findings were clearly erroneous, and that the State’s plan complied with the LIHEAA and was a permissible exercise of the State’s discretion. The focus of the State’s argument is that its revised plan permissibly reduces “windfall benefits” to persons in subsidized housing, yet still provides that those people residing in subsidized housing will receive more total heat subsidies than will non-subsidized households.

We have thoroughly reviewed the briefs, record, and oral arguments submitted by the parties, and affirm the judgment of the district court on the basis of its well-reasoned opinion. *See*8th Cir.R. 14.
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT 11




     COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998
     AND 1997: (In thousands, except per share amounts) 

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        1998             1997
                                                      --------         --------
<S>                                                   <C>              <C>     
Net income*                                           $  3,245         $  2,301

Earnings per common share:
     Basic                                            $    .26         $    .19
     Diluted                                          $    .24         $    .18

Shares outstanding (average):
     Common shares                                      13,609           13,211
     Treasury shares                                      (970)            (818)
                                                      --------         --------
Common shares - basic (average)                         12,639           12,393
Options: common equivalents                                739              679
Warrants: common equivalents                                19               --
                                                      --------         --------
Common shares - diluted (average)                       13,397           13,072
                                                      ========         ========
</TABLE>


*Note: The Company did not have any outstanding preferred stock for the periods
       ending March 31, 1997 through 1998.


                                       14
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 8, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50660 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ERNESTINA PINA,, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-02-CR-695-1-WWJ

-------------------- Before GARZA, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ernestina Pina argues that the evidence is insufficient to support her convictions for importation of marijuana and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Pina argues that the evidence fails to show that she was aware that 205 pounds of marijuana was hidden inside a diesel tank in the back of a borrowed truck that she presented to U.S. Customs Inspectors at the Del Rio, Texas, port of entry.No. 03-50660 -2- In light of the value of the marijuana, Pina’s somewhat implausible explanation for borrowing the truck, and her failure to offer a consistent explanation for a large amount of cash found in her possession, a rational jury could have concluded that Pina was aware of the marijuana hidden in the truck. United States v. Ramos-Garcia , 184 F.3d 463, 465-67 (5th Cir. 1999). We will not disturb that determination. United States v. Runyan , 290 F.3d 223, 240 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 537 U.S. 888 (2002).
AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7024

TONY CURTIS KILE, Petitioner - Appellant, versusHOWARD PAINTER, Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, Respondents - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (CA-97-97-1) Submitted: December 14, 1999 Decided: December 29, 1999 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Curtis Kile, Appellant Pro Se. Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., Dawn Ellen Warfield, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Tony Curtis Kile appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court'sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Kile v. Painter , No. CA-97-97-1 (N.D.W. Va. June 29, 1999). 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
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of BTU International, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to his knowledge:



| | 1. | the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended July 4, 2010 (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 for the periods
covered by the Report.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Peter J. TallianPeter J. TallianChief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer (principal financial and accounting officer)


Dated: August 5, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       7,968,576
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,283,596
<ALLOWANCES>                                   175,000
<INVENTORY>                                 18,911,652
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            41,039,299
<PP&E>                                      15,135,638
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,374,122
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              54,876,016
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,281,927
<BONDS>                                    144,269,595
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,608,000
<OTHER-SE>                               (110,283,506)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                54,876,016
<SALES>                                    121,457,537
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           121,457,537
<CGS>                                       77,592,619
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               93,521,530
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               708,702
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          10,675,340
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             16,551,965
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         16,551,965
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                16,551,965
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.55


</TABLE>
Exhibit 13.1  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER OF ABB LTD, PURSUANT TO SECTION 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 on Form 20-F
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 of ABB Ltd (the Company) as
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) on
the date hereof (the Report) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Joseph M.
Hogan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, that:  (1)the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (2)the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  By:
  /s/ Joseph M. HoganName:  Joseph M. HoganTitle:   Chief Executive Officer   Date: March 10,
2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         1296
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1296
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2046
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       780
<OTHER-SE>                                     1266
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2046
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               35
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (35)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (35)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (35)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0)



</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 State

          - [Public Notice 8980]

Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 2003, I hereby determine that the individual known as Ibrahim al-Rubaysh, also known as Ibrahimj Sulayman Muhammad Arbaysh, also known as Ibrahim Salman Mohammed Al Rubeish, also known as Sheikh Ibrahim Bin Sulayman Al Rubaysh, also known as Ibrahim Bin Sulayman Al Rubaysh, also known as Ibrahim al-Rubaish, also known as Abu Muhammad, poses a significant risk of committing acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.

Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 13224 that “prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,” I determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the measures authorized in the Order.

                    This notice shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Dated: December 11, 2014.

John F. Kerry,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2014-30217 Filed 12-23-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-AD-P
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

THE FOLLOWING CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANIES THE ISSUER'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
     AND IS NOT FILED, AS PROVIDED IN ITEM 601(b)(32)(ii) OF REGULATION SK
             PROMULGATED BY THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION.

     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 Choice One Communications Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K (the "Report") for the year ended December 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, we, Steve
M. Dubnik, Chief Executive Officer, and Ajay Sabherwal, Chief Financial Officer,
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our
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/ Steve M. Dubnik
         ---------------------------------
         Steve M. Dubnik
         Chief Executive Officer
         March 30, 2004


             /s/ Ajay Sabherwal
         ---------------------------------
         Ajay Sabherwal
         Chief Financial Officer
         March 30, 2004

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Choice One Communications Inc. and will be retained by them and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 10.1

 

VERBAL AGREEMENT WITH OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND PRINCIPAL SHAREHOLDERS

 

The document is to disclose the material terms of the verbal agreement between the Company and its officers, directors and principal shareholders who have verbally agreed to provide capital up to $100,000.

 

Borrower: 1PM Industries, Inc.

 

Lenders: Joseph Wade, Matt Billington, Wade Billington Partners, LLC

 

Loan Amount: up to $100,000

 

Interest Rate: 0%

 

Repayment Terms: 24 months from date the funds are borrowed

 

Amounts Borrowed: $12,000 from Joseph Wade
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2066 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2066

  To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Executive 
  Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisors, Salaries and 
                     Expenses for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Executive 
  Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisors, Salaries and 
                     Expenses for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF 
              THE PRESIDENT, COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISORS, SALARIES AND 
              EXPENSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Executive Office of the 
President, Council of Economic Advisors, Salaries and Expenses for 
fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $4,120,000.
                                 <all>
```