alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* This matter is being decided by a quorum. 28 U.S.C. §

46(d).

** 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-30193 Conference Calendar

GARY P. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus MARIE VARNADO; Dr. QUYEN TRAN, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-2544

- - - - - - - - - - February 9,1999 Before BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. *
PER CURIAM: ** Gary P. Smith, Louisiana prisoner #88648, appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust his prison administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). The Prison Litigation Reform Act amended § 1997e(a) to provide that no § 1983 action may be filed by a prisoner until available administrative remedies have been exhausted. § 1997e(a). Because Smith filed suit prior to exhausting available remedies, we affirm theNo. 97-30193 -2- dismissal. See Underwood v. Wilson , 151 F.3d 292, 294 (5th Cir. 1998).
AFFIRMED.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00038-CR

Robert Rebel Kemp, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 426TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 57,669, HONORABLE FANCY H. JEZEK, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Robert Rebel Kemp was convicted of criminal non-support and sentenced to

two years in prison, probated for five years. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 25.05 (West 2003). His

probation was revoked based on a plea bargain agreement in which Kemp pleaded true to an alleged

violation. He was sentenced to twenty-two months in state jail.

Kemp filed a notice of appeal, but the trial court has certified that this is a plea

bargain case and that Kemp has no right of appeal. The trial court record contains a document

entitled Adjudication/Revocation/Waivers, Agreements, Judicial Confession, signed by appellant

and his attorney, in which he “waives any right to a Motion for New Trial and Appeal.” The record

also contains a document entitled Waiver of Motion for New Trial and Motion in Arrest of Judgment

and Waiver of Right to Appeal, signed by appellant and his attorney, in which appellant states “[t]hat

he does not wish to appeal his conviction and expressly waives his right to appeal.”
Because the record does not contain a certification that the defendant has the right of

appeal, this appeal is dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).

 

G. Alan Waldrop, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Waldrop

Dismissed

Filed: February 26, 2010

Do Not Publish

2
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 CECILE FOY GSANGER

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

July 15, 2015

Hon. Jose L. Aliseda

Bee County District Attorney

111 S. St. Mary's St., Ste. 203

Beeville, TX 78102

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Rick Holstein

Attorney At Law

819 North Upper Broadway

Corpus Christi, TX 78401

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13-15-00008-CR

Tr.Ct.No. B-14-2042-0-CR-B

Style: Michael Cortez v. The State of Texas

Appellant’s motion for leave to file brief in the above cause was this day 

GRANTED by this Court. The brief has been ordered filed as of July 10, 2015, the date 

of receipt.

Very truly yours,

Cecile Foy Gsanger, Clerk

CFG:ch
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6018

ANTHONY ANDREWS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BRYAN K. DOBBS, Warden FCI Williamsburg,

Respondent - Appellee.

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

Greenville. David C. Norton, District Judge. (6:20-cv-03026-DCN)

Submitted: November 7, 2022 Decided: November 21, 2022 

Before WYNN and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Andrews, Appellant Pro Se. 

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6018 Doc: 18 Filed: 11/21/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Anthony Andrews appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) 

motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

the district court’s order. Andrews v. Dobbs, No. 6:20-cv-03026-DCN (D.S.C. Dec. 8, 

2021). 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.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6018 Doc: 18 Filed: 11/21/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-18-00137-CR

Marc Alym Kennedy

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From Criminal District Court No. 2

of Tarrant County (0525899A)

June 14, 2018

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By __/s/ Wade Birdwell_________________

 Justice Wade Birdwell
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.15

                               DAVOX CORPORATION

                    EXECUTUVE VICE PRESIDENT - PRODUCT GROUP

                              SEVERANCE AGREEMENT


DAVOX Corporation ("DAVOX") will provide to you the following terms and
condition of salary and benefits continuation:


  (1.) DAVOX shall provide a continuation of your base salary and medical
       benefits at DAVOX's cost, as may be in effect at the time of a qualifying
       termination as set forth in subclause 2, commencing upon the date of
       termination, for a period of six (6) months or until such time as you
       assume new employment, whichever comes first;

  (2.) DAVOX shall provide continuation of salary and benefits as set forth in
       subclause (1) in the event your employment is terminated for the
       following reasons: (a) economic layoff; (b) downsizing of the Marketing
       or Development organizations which results in the elimination of your
       position as Executive Vice President Product Group; or (c) reorganization
       of the Marketing or Development organizations which would require you to
       relocate.

Following the effective date of termination, as set forth in writing and
furnished to you by DAVOX, your employment with DAVOX shall cease and you shall
not hold yourself as an employee, agent, or representative of DAVOX.

Continuation of salary and benefits shall further be subject to your compliance
with any then existing company policies and such other terms as may be in effect
between you and DAVOX pertaining to the disclosure of confidential or
proprietary information.

DAVOX has final authority to determine all questions of eligibility to receive
benefits under this arrangement and to interpret and construe the terms of this
arrangement.

Approval:

              /s/ David M. Sample                          March 1, 2001
              -------------------                          -------------
              President and Chief Executive Officer        Date


              /s/ Jeffrey E. Anderholm                     March 1, 2001
              ------------------------                     -------------
              Executive Vice President - Product Group     Date
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, James M. Dahmus, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of SGS International, Inc.;

2. 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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange
Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                |  |                        
|--------------- |  | -----------------------
|August 14, 2006 |  | /s/ James M. Dahmus    
|                |  | James M. Dahmus        
|                |  | Chief Financial Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 22, 2019 p0515

Order 

Clerk

May 22, 2019

158263

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 158263

COA: 343601 

Lenawee CC: 16-017919-FH

MARK DOUGLAS SWANK, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 20, 2018 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
June 6, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

RANDI GOLDBERG, Appellant

NO. 14-11-01091-CV V.

TRACY ZINN, Appellee

____________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Tracy Zinn, 

signed October 24, 2011, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have 

inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of 

the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellant, Randi Goldberg, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Buckeye GP Holdings L.P. (“BGH”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedJune 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Vance E. Powers, Acting Chief FinancialOfficer of MainLine Management LLC, thegeneral partner of BGH, hereby certify, to my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of BGH.
|                |   | MAINLINE MANAGEMENT LLC, as general partner of BGH |
|---------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
| Date: July 30, 2007 |   | /s/ VANCE E. POWERS                                |
|                |   | Vance E. Powers                                    |
|                |   | *Acting Chief Financial Officer*                   |

 

----
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Brian Woods, Appellant, v New York State Thruway Authority et al., Respondents. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

Submitted August 6, 2012;

decided October 25, 2012

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: USPLS, LC v. Patrick Gaas and Daniel Shank

Appellate case number: 01

- 20

- 00 604

- CV

Trial court case number: 201 9

- 42530

Trial court: 1 29 th District Court of Harris County

Appellant, USPLS, LC , has filed an unopposed motion to substitute counsel on appeal . Appellant is currently represented by Ross Spence and Bryan Prentice of Snow & Green LLP f/k/a Snow Spence Green LLP. Mr. Spence, appellant’s attorney in charge on appeal, has withdrawn from Snow & Green LLP, and as of September 30, 2020, is practicing at Spence, Desenberg & Lee PLLC. Accordingly, appellant requests that Bryan Prentice of Snow & Green LLP, be allowed to withdraw as appellant’s counsel, and Mr. Spence and Henry W. Knight of Spence, Desenberg & Lee PLLC , be substitute d as counsel on appeal. The motion is granted

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 6.5(b).

The Clerk of this Court is directed to note the withdrawal of Bryan Prentice of Snow

& Green LLP as counsel for appellant and substitute Ross Spence and Henry W. Knight of Spence, Desenberg & Lee PLLC as counsel for appellant on the docket of this Court.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

_____ /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

______  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ October 27, 2020

___
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Angela G. Clough v. Bryan S. Ryan

Appellate case number: 01

- 21

- 00474

- CV

Trial court case number: 101576

- F

Trial court: 300th District Court of Brazoria County

Appellant, Angela G. Clough, has filed a second “ U nopposed Motion to Ext end Time to

File Parties ’ Notification to Court of M ediator and Motion to Extend D eadline to Conduct

Mediation. ” Appellant ’ s motion is granted. The deadline for the parties to notify the C ourt of

their selection of mediator is December 13, 2021. The deadli ne for the parties to c onduct

mediation is January 14 , 202 2.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

___________ /s/ Julie Countiss

__________ Acting individually

Date: Novem b er 23, 2021
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 15 (Monday, January 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 4460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1490]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-64,190]


Hafner USA, Inc.: New York, NY; Notice of Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated January 1, 2009, the Department of Labor 
(Department) received a request for administrative reconsideration of 
the Department's Notice of negative determination regarding workers' 
eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and 
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) applicable to workers 
and former workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on 
November 26, 2008. The Department's Notice of determination was 
published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75138). 
The subject workers are engaged in textile distribution services for 
goods produced in Canada.
    The negative determination was based on the Department's findings 
that the petitioning workers do not support a firm or appropriate 
subdivision that produces an article domestically.
    In the request for reconsideration, a worker alleged that the 
subject workers' work was related to the textile manufactured in 
affiliated facilities in North Carolina, Virginia, New York, and 
related to the textile dyed and finished at an affiliated facility in 
Pennsylvania.
    The Department has carefully reviewed the request for 
reconsideration, and has determined that the Department will conduct 
further investigation to determine if the workers meet the eligibility 
requirements of the Trade Act of 1974.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. 
Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, 
granted.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of January 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-1490 Filed 1-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 639 

Requiring that all Members have non-participatory access to committee proceedings related to matters referred to by the Speaker in her announcement of September 24, 2019. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 18, 2019 

Mr. SCALISE (for himself and Mr. COLE) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Requiring that all Members have non-participatory access 

to committee proceedings related to matters referred to 

by the Speaker in her announcement of September 24, 

2019. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

3 This resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Open and Trans4 parent Impeachment Investigation Resolution’’. 

5 SEC. 2. ACCESS TO COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS. 

6 A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall 

7 not be excluded from non-participatory attendance at com8 mittee proceedings related to matters referred to by the 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 639 IH 

1 Speaker in her announcement of September 24, 2019, in2 cluding transcribed interviews and depositions, notwith3 standing regulations issued by the chair of the Committee 

4 on Rules pursuant to section 103(a)(2) of H. Res. 6, at 

5 the following committees: 

6 (1) Permanent Select Committee on Intel7 ligence. 

8 (2) Committee on Oversight and Reform. 

9 (3) Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

10 (4) Committee on Financial Services. 

11 (5) Committee on Ways and Means. 

12 (6) Committee on the Judiciary. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-14845

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-00541-ODE

DERRICK COWAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FIRST COMMUNITIES MANAGEMENT, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

________________________

(July 20, 2015)

Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judge, and SMITH,

*

District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

 * Honorable C. Lynwood Smith, Jr., United States District Judge for the Northern District of 

Alabama, sitting by designation.

Case: 14-14845 Date Filed: 07/20/2015 Page: 1 of 2 
2

We have read and carefully considered the briefs and the relevant parts of 

the record, heard oral argument, and conferred about this case. Having done so, 

we conclude that the district court’s judgment is due to be affirmed for the reasons 

set out in the district court’s order to which we have nothing to add. 

AFFIRMED.

Case: 14-14845 Date Filed: 07/20/2015 Page: 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-5931

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JEROME WALDEN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.

(CR-95-63)

Submitted: July 25, 1996 Decided: August 14, 1996

Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory William Franklin, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen

F. Fahey, United States Attorney, David John Novak, Assistant

United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Jerome Walden seeks to appeal his sentence of 210 months imprisonment. Walden pled guilty to possession of more than 50 grams

of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C.A. § 841 (West

1981 & Supp. 1996). He argues that the district court erred in refusing to depart below the guideline range on two grounds. Because

Walden expressly waived his right to appeal his sentence in his

plea agreement, we dismiss the appeal.

Paragraph Five of Walden's plea agreement stated:

The defendant is aware that Title 18, United States Code,

Section 3742 affords a defendant the right to appeal the

sentence imposed. Acknowledging all this, the defendant

knowingly waives the right to appeal any sentence within

the maximum provided in the statute(s) of conviction (or

the manner in which that sentence was determined) on the

grounds set forth in Title 18, United States Code, Section 3742 or on any ground whatever, in exchange for the

concessions made by the United States in this plea agreement. This agreement does not affect the rights or obligations of the United States as set forth in Title 18,

United States Code, Section 3742(b).

Before accepting Walden's guilty plea, the district court

inquired of Walden whether he understood the key provisions of his

plea agreement, including the waiver provision. Walden said he did.

There is nothing in the materials before us to indicate that he did

not comprehend the significance of the waiver. A defendant may

waive his statutory right to appeal his sentence if the waiver is

knowing and voluntary. United States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496

(4th Cir. 1992). We find that Walden's waiver was valid.

We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
3

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED