alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-15-00355-CV

____________________

IN THE INTEREST OF R.K.P.

_______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 279th District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. F-189061-C

________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

On October 28, 2015, we notified the parties that this appeal would be 

dismissed for want of prosecution unless arrangements were made for the filing of 

the record or the appellant explained why additional time was needed to file the 

record. On October 29, 2015, we notified the parties that the filing fee had not been 

paid and warned that the appeal would be dismissed unless the appellant remitted 

the filing fee for the appeal. Appellant did not respond to this Court’s notices.

An appellant who wishes to proceed on appeal without payment of costs 

must file an affidavit of indigence. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. An appeal may be 
2

dismissed if the appellant fails to comply with a requirement of the Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure, or fails to respond to a notice from the Clerk of the Court 

requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See Tex. R. App. P. 

42.3(c).

Appellant did not file an affidavit of indigence on appeal and has not shown 

that she is entitled to proceed without payment of costs. See generally Tex. R. App. 

P. 20.1. Appellant failed to comply with notices that required a response. See Tex.

R. App. P. 42.3(c). There being no reasonable explanation for the failure to pay the 

filing fee for the appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R.

App. P. 42.3.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

 ________________________________

 CHARLES KREGER

 Justice

 

Submitted on December 22, 2015

Opinion Delivered December 23, 2015

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-15-00020-CV

RANDY DALE BARNETT, Appellant

V.

JERRY COYLE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 62nd District Court

Lamar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 84100

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The appellant, Randy Dale Barnett, has filed a motion with this Court seeking to dismiss 

this appeal. Pursuant to Rule 42.1(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the motion is 

granted. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1).

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: July 13, 2015

Date Decided: July 14, 2015
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 Quarterly Report of LILM, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, George I. Norman, III, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
 
 
 /s/   George I. Norman, III
 
 George I. Norman, III
 Chief Executive Officer
 Principal Accounting Officer
 August 16, 2010
 
 
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  The foregoing certifications are accompanying the Company's Form 10-Q solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6600

RAYSHAWN PEARSON, a/k/a Rayshawn Kalif Pearson,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN JOSEPH MCFADDEN,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Beaufort. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (9:14-cv-03943-TMC)

Submitted: September 18, 2018 Decided: September 21, 2018

Before WILKINSON and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rayshawn Kalif Pearson, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Rayshawn Pearson seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge, granting Respondent’s summary judgment 

motion, and denying relief on Pearson’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We dismiss 

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or 

order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. 

App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on August 15, 2017. The 

notice of appeal was filed on May 13, 2018.

*

 Because Pearson failed to file a timely 

notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of 

appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for 

mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

THOMAS JAMES MCNULTY,

Appellant,

v.

ROSE OLIVO, ANTHONY OLIVO, and RENE COLEY, as Agent of 

ATLANTIC SHORE REALTY EXECUTIVES, LLC, d/b/a ATLANTIC 

SHORE REALTY EXPERTISE,

Appellees.

No. 4D21-2828

[July 21, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Laurie E. Buchanan, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

562021CA000751.

Thomas James McNulty, Florida City, pro se.

No brief filed for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., WARNER and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 123 (Monday, June 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 31053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15297]



[[Page 31053]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,825]


Castec, Inc., North Hollywood, CA; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on April 21, 2009 in response to a worker 
petition filed by workers of Castec, Inc., North Hollywood, California.
    The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of May 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-15297 Filed 6-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
#### Theresa Letterese, Appellant, v State of New York, Respondent.

[821 NYS2d 468]

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the claimant appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Mignano, J.), dated December 8, 2004, which, upon a decision of the same court dated November 9, 2004, made after a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, dismissed the claim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The claimant, then an inmate at the Beacon Correctional Facility, allegedly was injured while assigned to a work crew that was painting a Department of Transportation garage in Eoughkeepsie. Just prior to the accident, the plaintiff was attempting to paint the upper portion of an 18- or 20-foot wall while standing on the top cap of an unsecured 10-foot high stepladder. She sustained injuries when the ladder toppled, causing her to fall to the ground. The claimant conceded that ■ “[t]here were several different ladders” on site, although it is unclear from the record whether any ladder other than the subject stepladder was actually available to her at the time of the accident. Following a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, the Court of Claims determined that the State was not negligent

and dismissed the claim. We affirm.

As this case was tried to the court, without a jury, this Court’s power to review the evidence is as broad as that of the trial court, “taking into account in a close case the fact that the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses” *(Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford,*60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Here, the State, acting through its correctional authorities, had only a common-law duty to provide the claimant with reasonably safe equipment as well as sufficient warnings and instructions for the safe operation of the work and equipment *(see Manganaro v State of New York,*24 AD3d 1003, 1004 [2005]; *Muhammad v State of New York,*15 AD3d 807, 808 [2005]; *Maldonado v State of New York,*255 AD2d 630, 631 [1998]; *Martinez v State of New York,*225 AD2d 877, 878 [1996]).

On this record, we discern no basis to disturb the court’s *594finding that the claimant’s own negligence in climbing on the top cap of the stepladder was the sole proximate cause of the accident *(cf. Robinson v East Med. Ctr., LP,*6 NY3d 550 [2006]). Florio, J.E, Luciano, Spolzino and Fisher, JJ., concur.
[847 NYS2d 855]

#### In the Matter of David J. Bershad, an Attorney, Respondent. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner.

First Department,

December 27, 2007

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Thomas J. Cahill, Chief Counsel, Departmental Disciplinary Committee,*New York City *(Raymond Vallejo*of counsel), for petitioner.

*83
      *David J. Bershad,*respondent pro se.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent David J. Bershad was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on February 10, 1965. At all times relevant herein, respondent was a partner with the law firm formerly known as Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP, located within the First Judicial Department.

On July 9, 2007, respondent was convicted, upon his guilty plea in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, of conspiracy to obstruct justice and to make false material declarations in violation of 18 USC § 371, which is a felony under the United States Code. The basis of this conviction was that, for over 20 years, respondent, a named partner at a securities plaintiffs law firm, conspired in the payment of illegal kickbacks to individual class action plaintiffs and obstructed justice by corruptly influencing the administration of justice and making false statements in court. As part of his plea agreement, respondent agreed to, among other things, cooperate in the government’s ongoing investigation and forfeit $7.75 million to the government. Respondent is scheduled to be sentenced on June 23, 2008.

Respondent pro se has submitted an affidavit of resignation pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11. The Committee now seeks an order accepting respondent’s affidavit of resignation from the practice of law and has submitted an affirmation in support of his resignation pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 (b), recommending that his request for resignation be granted and his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys.

In light of respondent’s submission of an affidavit in compliance with 22 NYCRR 603.11, the Committee’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law should be granted *(see Matter of Bolan,*28 AD3d 172 [2006]; *Matter of Percy,*14 AD3d 26 [2004]). Moreover, respondent’s guilty plea to a federal felony supports acceptance of his resignation *(see e.g. Matter of Bolan, supra; Matter of Perrone, 2*AD3d 35 [2003]).

Accordingly, the Committee’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law and striking his name from the roll of attorneys in the State of New York should be granted, and respondent’s name stricken, effective nunc pro tunc to September 12, 2007.

*84Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Catterson and Kavanagh, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, nunc pro tunc to September 12, 2007.
Elizabeth A. Young, CSR, RPR 

Official Court Reporter 

P. O. Box 747 

Belton, Texas 76513 

254 933-5268 

July 14, 2015 

Mr. Jeffrey D. Kyle 

Clerk, Court of Appeals 

P. O. Box 12547 

Austin, Texas 78711-2547 

tel 512 463-1733 

fax 512 463-1685 

In re: State vs Tracy Larance Gordon 

 COA: 03-15-00238-CR TC # 71326 

 03-15-00239-CR TC #: 71325 

 03-15-00240-CR TC #: 71792 

Attn: Chris Knowles 

Dear Chris, 

I am requesting an extension to complete this reporter's 

record by July 28, 2015. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ Elizabeth A. Young 

Elizabeth A. Young 

cc: Troy Hurley
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           2,721
<SECURITIES>                                   142,890
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,005
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 150,616
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,639
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     146,977
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   150,616
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,187
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,090
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,097
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,097
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,097
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT  10.6
FISCAL 2001 EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN

                       CHEMICAL CONSORTIUM HOLDINGS, INC.

                      Fiscal 2001 Equity Compensation Plan


     The  purpose  of this Chemical Consortium Holdings, Inc. Fiscal 2001 Equity
Compensation  Plan  (the "Plan") is to enable Chemical Consortium Holdings, Inc.
(the  "Company")  to  offer  and  issue  to certain employees, former employees,
advisors  and consultants of the Company and its affiliates, common stock of the
Company  as  payment  for  amounts  owed  by  the Company to such third parties.

1.   The  aggregate number of shares of common stock that may be issued pursuant
to  the  Plan  shall  not  exceed  2,500,000  shares.

2.   The  Company  may  from  time to time issue to employees, former employees,
advisors and consultants to the Company or its affiliates shares of common stock
of  the  Company  in  payment or exchange for or in  settlement or compromise of
amounts due by the Company to such persons for goods sold and delivered or to be
delivered  or  services  rendered  or  to  be  rendered.

3.   Shares  of  common  stock  issued pursuant to the Plan shall be issued at a
price per share of not less than  ninety-five  percent  (95%) of the fair market
value  per  share on the date of issuance and on such other terms and conditions
as  determined  by  the  Company.

4.   This  Plan  may  be  amended at any time by the Company.

5.   The  Plan  was  adopted  by  the  Board on October 29, 2001.  The effective
date  of  the  Plan  shall  be  the  same.

Dated as of November 12, 2001


                                         CHEMICAL CONSORTIUM HOLDINGS, INC.

                                         By:  /s/  J.  Greig
                                            ---------------------------
                                         J.  Greig,  President
                                         Chief  Executive  Office


                                        10
<PAGE>
IV 

House Calendar No. 50 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 655 

[Report No. 116–263] 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 296) affirming the 

United States record on the Armenian Genocide. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 28, 2019 

Mr. MCGOVERN, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 296) 

affirming the United States record on the Armenian 

Genocide. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order without intervention of any point of order 

3 to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 296) af4 firming the United States record on the Armenian Geno5 cide. The resolution shall be considered as read. The pre6 vious question shall be considered as ordered on the reso7 lution and preamble to adoption without intervening moVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:18 Oct 28, 2019 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR655.RH HR655

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 655 RH 

1 tion or demand for division of the question except one hour 

2 of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 

3 ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign 

4 Affairs. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
House Calendar No. 50 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 655 

[Report No. 116–263] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. 

the Armenian Genocide. Res. 296) affirming the United States record on 

OCTOBER 28, 2019 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Exhibit 13.2

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of BHP Billiton Plc and BHP Billiton Limited, (the
Companies) for the annual period ended 30 June 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned officer of the Companies, hereby certifies, to such officers
knowledge, 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 Companies.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                 |  |                        
|---------------- |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Peter Beaven
|Name:            |  | Peter Beaven           
|Title:           |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:            |  | 23 September 2015      

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to
the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.
**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 Sterling Financial Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Roger Moyer, Jr., President andChief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                 |
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                 |

| Dated:          March 13, 2006 | By:    | /s/ J. Roger Moyer, Jr.               |
|--------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                           |   |                                       |
|                           |   | J. Roger Moyer, Jr.                   |
|                           |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

----