alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 22, 2015

Hon. Anne Lorentzen

District Clerk

901 Leopard, Suite 313

Corpus Christi, TX 78401

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13-15-00189-CR

Tr.Ct.No. 14-CR-2699-E

Style: Leonard Sanchez v. The State of Texas

The judgment of the trial court was DISMISSED-WANT OF JURISDICTION by this Court 

on the 4th day of June, 2015. The mandate is enclosed.

Tex R. App. P. 51.2(a)(1) provides that the clerk of the trial court shall send an 

acknowledgment to the clerk of the appellate court of the receipt of the mandate. Please review 

the requirements of Tex. R. App. P. 51.2(b) regarding the issuance of a capias in cases in which 

the trial court’s judgment is affirmed and the defendant is not in custody.

Please sign the attached acknowledgment of receipt of the mandate and submit through 

the TAMES Records Submission Portal (RSP) as soon as possible.

Very truly yours,

Cecile Foy Gsanger, Clerk

CFG:ch

Enc.

cc: Hon. Larry M. Cunningham (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Hon. Mark Skurka (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

I hereby acknowledge receipt of the mandate in cause no. 13-15-00189-CR this 

________ day of _________________, 2015.

District/County Clerk, 

By :____________________________
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CO-PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Owens-Illinois
Group, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that to such officer's knowledge:



|Dated: March 15, 2004 |  | /s/THOMAS L. YOUNG                                     
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------
|                      |  | Thomas L. Young
Co-President
Owens-Illinois Group, Inc.

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

---

QuickLinks
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
Annual Report of Archon Corporation, a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Paul W. Lowden, Chairman of
the Board, President and Principal Executive Officer of the Company and Grant L. Siler, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350), that to his knowledge:



| |  |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: December 21, 2010



|                                                                
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Paul W. Lowden                                              
|Paul W. Lowden                                                  
|Chairman of the Board, President
And Principal Executive Officer
|                                                                
|/s/ Grant L. Siler                                              
|Grant L. Siler                                                  
|Principal Accounting Officer
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO andCFO**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350,**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Angeles Income Properties, Ltd. 6 (the"Partnership"), for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Steven D.Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, andStephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of thePartnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to thebest of his knowledge:

 

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 

 

 

This certification isfurnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
Court of Appeals 

First District of Texas 

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01-14-00304-CV

TVMAX Holdings, Inc. and Broadband Ventures Six, L.L.C. 

v.

Spring Independent School District, et al.

NO. 2011-53254 IN THE 270TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

SUPP CLK RECORD

SUPP CLK RECORD

SUPP CLK RECORD

MT FEE

MT FEE

SUPP CLK RECORD

MT FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

SUPP CLK RECORD

MT FEE

MT FEE

CLK RECORD

STATEWIDE EFILING

FILING

$36.00

$37.00

$36.00

$10.00

$10.00

$17.00

$10.00

$10.00

$10.00

$54.00

$10.00

$10.00

$189.00

$20.00

$175.00

01/06/2015

10/08/2014

10/08/2014

09/16/2014

09/12/2014

09/08/2014

08/15/2014

08/11/2014

08/11/2014

07/23/2014

07/09/2014

06/09/2014

05/12/2014

04/28/2014

04/28/2014

PAID

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

NOT PAID

NOT PAID

UNKNOWN

NOT PAID

NOT PAID

E-PAID

PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

APE

APE

APE

APE

APE

APE

APE

APE

APE

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are 

$634.00.

Court costs in this case have been taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine, Clerk of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do hereby 
certify that this is a true statement of the costs of appeal in this case.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my 

hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the 

First District of Texas, this July 13, 2015.
@article{1216656,
  author = {Timothy Livingston Large and David Nesbitt},
  title = {Quantum-State-Resolved Scattering of OCS at the Gas-Liquid Interface: Hyperthermal versus Thermal Vibrational Equilibration Dynamics in Polyatomics},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-09-07 04:09:00},
  publisher = {The Journal of Physical Chemistry C},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=956793},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.3c02554},
  language = {en},
}
50 Occupational Outlook Quarterly ● Winter 2000-01

High-paying jobs

requiring on-the-job training

People who want to start a good career after high school

have many options. On-the-job training, not academic

coursework, is the most significant source of preparation

for most occupations. And many on-the-job training

occupations pay well. In fact, most of the workers in the

occupations shown on the chart are in the highest earnings quartile—they are among the highest paid 25 percent

of all workers. These occupations are expected to have job

openings for thousands of new workers annually between

1998 and 2008. The openings will result from job growth

and from workers who retire or leave the occupations

permanently for other reasons.

All but two of the occupations in the chart—operating

engineer and postal mail carrier—require long-term on-thejob-training. In long-term on-the-job training, workers receive

instruction for more than 1 year while employed in an

occupation. Operating engineers need moderate-term onthe-job training, which involves 1 to 12 months of paid onthe-job experience and informal training. Postal mail carriers

receive short-term on-the-job training, developing the skills

they need after a brief demonstration of job duties or 1

month or less of paid on-the-job experience or instruction.
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited onl y in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1


# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Argued January 21, 2016 Decided January 25, 2016



### Before

R ICHARD A. P OSNER , Circuit Judge

F RANK H. E ASTERBROOK , Circuit Judge

M ICHAEL S. K ANNE , Circuit Judge

No. 14

- 3342

R AVI K ADIYALA , Plaintiff

- Appellant

,

v

.

B ANK OF A MERICA , N.A.

, Defendant

- Appellee

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division.

No. 13 C 4533 Joan H. Lefkow

, Judge

.

Order

After Ravi Kadiyala purchased 49% of the stock of Euro International Mortgage, Inc. (EIM), the firm opened a new account (Account 9378) at Bank of America. Kadiyala was an authorized signatory on that account. EIM provided him with credentials (username and password ) that afforded him access to EIM’s other accou nts at the Bank . He used those credentials to transfer $200,000 out of Account 3998, of which he was not a sign atory, into Account 9378. He then instructed the B ank to issue cashier ’ s checks against
the new ba lance in Account 9378. When he learned what Kadi yala had done, Mark Pupke, an authorized signatory on both accounts (and owner of the other 51% of EIM’s stock) , told the Bank to cancel the transfer and restore the funds to Account 3998. TheNo. 14

- 3342 Page 2

Bank complied. Kadiyala contends in this suit under the diversity jurisdiction that, by

rever s ing the transfers and cancelling the checks, the Bank violated his rights under the
d e posit contracts . The district court granted summary judg ment to the Bank

.

Kadiyala’s appellate argument encounters multiple obstacles, each of which require s us to affirm the district court’s judgment.

First, Kadiyala was not an authorized signatory on Account 3998 and had no co ntractual entitlement (either as a party or a third

- party ben eficiary) to specify how the balance of that account would be applied.

Second, Pupke unquestionably did have authority over Account 3998 and told the Bank that the movement of the money was unauthorized. Kadiyala does not identify any rule of Illinois law (which governs this dispute) providing that, when a bank r eceives inconsistent instructions, it must al ways prefer the first in time.

Third, EIM, not either Kadiyala or Pupke, was the depositor. EIM was entitled to d ecide, through its own rules of corporate governance, who would speak for it. EIM has never contended that it authorized the transfer of funds from Account 3998 to Account 9378, or that it wants $200,000 disbursed to the person Kadiyala specified.

Fourth, the person who acquires rights under a cashier’s check is the payee. Yet the payee has not protested the Bank’s reversal of the transfer or t he stop

- payment order on the checks. Kadiyala is not authorized to assert claims on behalf of the payee

.

A FFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         6,804
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  29,495
<ALLOWANCES>                                   790
<INVENTORY>                                    17,169
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               57,614
<PP&E>                                         115,518
<DEPRECIATION>                                 57,085
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 167,666
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          24,754
<BONDS>                                        103,233
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       707
<OTHER-SE>                                     30,869
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   167,666
<SALES>                                        193,748
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               193,748
<CGS>                                          165,484
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  165,484
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               19,673
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             8,616
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (25)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   432
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (457)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (457)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.06)
        


</TABLE>
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed July 10, 2015.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-14-00182-CR

TRAVIS LEE ANDERSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F12-50734-J

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang, Brown, and Whitehill

Opinion by Justice Brown

Appellant Travis Lee Anderson pleaded guilty to unauthorized possession of a firearm by 

a felon with no agreement about punishment. The trial court assessed punishment at two years’ 

imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is 

wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in 

effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12 

(Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. See 

Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate 

courts and counsel in Anders cases).
–2–

We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file any 

response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties 

of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases).

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 

826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court's duty in Anders cases). We agree 

the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably 

support the appeal.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Do Not Publish

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

140182F.U05

/Ada Brown/

ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

TRAVIS LEE ANDERSON, Appellant

No. 05-14-00182-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

No. 3, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F12-50734-J.

Opinion delivered by Justice Brown. Justices 

Lang and Whitehill participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 10th day of July, 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
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ William J. HoranWilliam J. Horan, Chairman, President and Director(Principal Executive Officer)Dated:  August 13, 2007
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ernesto Rebollar MEDRANO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-10260

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 30, 2012.

Nancy E. Larson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jerry Van Beard, Esq., Laura S. Harper, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ernesto Rebollar Medrano has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Rebol-lar Medrano has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
An unpublisHled order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.

‘SuPREME CourT
oF
Nevapa

(0) 167A EB

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

NIKCI BOYD, No. 67662
Petitioner,

vs. FILED

YVONNE LINSEY BOYD; LIL HOPE
BOYD; AND ARTHUR GALTON, JUL 22 2015
Respondents.

TRACIE K. LINDEMAN
CHER EO SUPREME COURT

BY
DEPUTY CLERK

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION
Having considered this original pro se writ petition, we deny
the requested relief. NRAP 21(b)(1); Pan v. Kighth Judicial Dist. Court,
120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). (explaining that petitioner
bears the burden of demonstrating that writ relief is warranted).
It is so ORDERED.! .

Oh _,

Saitta

: ekwaiiy

Gibbons Pickering J

ee: Nikci Boyd
Arthur Galton
Lil Hope Boyd
Yvonne Linsey Boyd

1To the extent that petitioner seeks a stay, that request is denied.

The clerk of this court shall file the exhibits to the writ petition that
were provisionally received in this court on March 30, 2015.

1S-22230
@conference{1213311,
  author = {Clyburn Cunningham and Susanne M. Furman and Julie Haney},
  title = {Mind the Gap: Exploring Human-Centered Security Researcher-Practitioner Interactions (Extended Abstract)},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-08-06 04:08:00},
  publisher = {Poster session at Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, Anaheim, CA, US},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=956182},
  language = {en},
}
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00465-CR

Abelino Hernandez

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

24th District Court of Victoria County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 14-04-27866-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 23, 2015
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Archon Corporation, a Nevada corporation (the
Company), on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Paul W. Lowden, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Grant L. Siler, Principal
Accounting Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his knowledge:



| |  |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                        
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: January 9, 2009                                                                  
|                                                                                        
|/s/ Paul W. Lowden                                                                      
|Paul W. Lowden Chairman of the Board and President (Principal Executive
Officer)        
|                                                                                        
|/s/ Grant L. Siler                                                                      
|Grant L. Siler Principal Accounting Officer (Principal Accounting and Financial
Officer)