alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Motion Granted; Order filed August 20, 2013

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00101

- CR

____________ JORGE GUERRERO , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1354948



### O R D E R
Appellant filed a motion requesting the clerk’s record in this case to be supplemented with the juvenile clerk's record in cause number 2012

- 00331J in the
314th Juvenile District Court. The Harris County District Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record on or before September 20, 2013, containing the juvenile clerk's record in
cause number 2012

- 00331J in the 314th Juvenile District Court.If the omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to

file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that the omitted item is not a part of the case file. Appellant’s brief is due 30 days after the date the supplemental clerk’s
record is fi led.

PER CURIAM
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-47646) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Plan, 2000Director Option Plan, 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, 2000 Stock Plan and options to purchase Series E Preferred Stock; the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-55504) pertaining to the 2000 Stock Plan, and the Registration Statement (FormS-8 No. 333-74768) pertaining to the Transilica Inc. 2001 Amended and Restated Equity Incentive Plan (as assumed by the registrant) and Domain Knowledge, Inc. 2000 Stock Option, Deferred Stock and Restricted Stock Plan (as assumed by the registrant)with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Microtune, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year ended December 31, 2002. 

 

/s/ Ernst and Young LLP 

 

Dallas, Texas 

March 9, 2004
Exhibit 32.2





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 Mattmar Minerals, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 30, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Kirk M. Warshaw, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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, as amended;
  and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.





Dated:
December 23, 2010





/s/
      Kirk M. WarshawKirk
      M. WarshawChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer)




A signed
original of this certification 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.
Exhibit
      32.2





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





The
      undersigned, Patricia E. Dowell, the Secretary of Franklin Towers Enterprises,
      Inc. (the “Company”), certifies, under the standards set forth and solely for
      the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on
      Form
      10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 fully complies
      with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
      Act
      of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Dated:
      November 13, 2006


By:
              /s/ Patricia
                E. DowellName:
              Patricia
                E. DowellTitle:
              Secretary


A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
NO. 12-08-00017-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

KELLY SMITH, § APPEAL FROM THE 241ST

APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Kelly Smith appeals his conviction for assault-family violence. Appellant entered a guilty

plea without benefit of a plea bargain. The trial court found him guilty and assessed punishment at

fifteen years of imprisonment. In his sole issue, Appellant asserts the judgment fails to reflect the

amount of restitution ordered by the trial court. We modify the judgment and affirm as modified.

BACKGROUND

Appellant pleaded guilty to the offense of assault-family violence. At the sentencing hearing,

the trial court orally pronounced punishment atfifteen years of imprisonment. The court specifically

stated that no fine is assessed, court costs are ordered paid, and restitution is ordered in the amount

determined to be due by the presentence investigation, $709.88, to cover the costs of ambulance

service required by the victim. The judgment, instead of stating the amount of restitution ordered,

states “TO BE DETERMINED.”

ANALYSIS

A defendant’s sentence must be pronounced orally in his presence. TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC.

ANN. art. 42.03, § 1(a) (Vernon Supp. 2008). The judgment, including the sentence assessed, is just

the written declaration and embodiment of that oral pronouncement. Taylor v. State, 131 S.W.3d
2

497, 500 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). When there is a conflict between the oral pronouncement of

sentence and the sentence in the written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls. Id. This court

has the authority to modify incorrect judgments when the necessary information is available to do

so. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b). Here, the trial court’s oral pronouncement included restitution in

the amount of $709.88. Therefore, the judgment should reflect that Appellant is to pay restitution

in the amount of $709.88. We sustain Appellant’s sole issue.

DISPOSITION

Because the written judgment must conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence, we

modify the trial court’s judgment to state that Appellant is ordered to pay $709.88 in restitution. 

The trial court’s judgment is affirmed as modified.

 JAMES T. WORTHEN 

 Chief Justice

Opinion delivered July 31, 2009.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)
#### ABERDEEN HILLS SECOND CORPORATION v. Joseph J. BIAFORE, Helen Biafore, J. J. Biafore, Inc., Bidi Corporation, Stafore Corporation, Developers of Oxford Park, Inc., Oxford Park Holding Company, Inc., and Sephlen Corporation.

Civ. A. No. 27133.

United States District Court E. D. Pennsylvania.

Jan. 7, 1960.

*503Pace Reich, Philadelphia, Pa., Martin H. Philip, Slatington, Pa., Leon H. Kline, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

John Swartz, Morris L. Rush, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendants.

EGAN, District Judge.

This is a motion by the defendants to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the plaintiff corporation was not duly authorized to maintain this action and that as to the corporate defendants the complaint does not adequately state a cause of action against them.

 On a motion to dismiss, all the facts well pleaded in the complaint must be taken as admitted.

> “It is also well-settled that on a motion to dismiss the complaint must be viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and that the complaint should not be dismissed unless it appears to a certainty that the plaintiff would not be entitled to relief under any state of facts which could be proved in support of his claim; further, no matter how likely it may seem that the pleader will be unable to prove his case, he is entitled, upon averring a claim, to an opportunity to try to prove it.” Frederick Hart & Co. Inc. v. Recordgraph Corporation, 3 Cir., 1948, 169 F.2d 580, 581.

See also Continental Collieries Co. v. Shober, 3 Cir., 1942, 130 F.2d 631; Carroll v. Morrison Hotel Corp., 7 Cir., 1945, 149 F.2d 404.

The suit on its face is an action by Aberdeen Hills Second Corporation, a Maryland corporation, against the individual defendants who are residents of Pennsylvania, and the corporate defendants who are Pennsylvania corporations. It seeks an accounting of the individual defendants for moneys which they, as officers and managers of plaintiff corporation, are alleged to have collected for the plaintiff and which they converted to their own use and that of the corporate defendants.

Since this action is by the plaintiff corporation to recover funds which are allegedly due it from the defendants, it must be deemed *prima, facie*to have authority to maintain the action. If, in fact, this suit is improperly brought by plaintiff corporation, the question must be raised as an affirmative defense being a matter of avoidance in accordance with Rule 8(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. 28 U.S.C. On this phase of the case, we rely upon and agree with the conclusion reached in the case of Syracuse Broadcasting Co. v. Newhouse, D.C., 14 F.R.D. 168.

The defendants, as an additional ground, aver that the complaint is improper and defective because it fails to assert or establish a cause of action as to the corporate defendants. For similar reasons and on the same authorities cited above, this motion must also fail.

The motion to dismiss will be denied without prejudice.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Robert Lynn SHEATS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-20267

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 17, 2012.

Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Seth Kretzer, Law Offices of Seth Kret-zer, Houston, TX, Defendant-Appellant.

Robert Lynn Sheats, pro se.

Before DAVIS, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Robert Lynn Sheats 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). Sheats 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.
# Total Factor Productivity in Major Industries

The Total Factor Productivity for Major Industries (PROD5) release presents data on total factor productivity for 61 three-digit industries and 21 major industries, including manufacturing.  Total factor productivity measures the change in output per unit of combined inputs.  This release is issued annually.  For more information, visit the Productivity home page at www.bls.gov/productivity/.

- Total factor productivity increases in 9 out of 21 major industries in 2022
- Total factor productivity increased in 15 out of 21 major industries in 2021
- Total factor productivity declined in 16 out of 21 major industries in 2020
- Manufacturing multifactor productivity declines 1.6% in 2019
- Manufacturing multifactor productivity declines 1.0% in 2018
- Multifactor productivity decreases 1.4% in 2017, following a 2.8% decrease in 2016
- Multifactor productivity in manufacturing down 3.2% in 2016, largest decline in series
- Multifactor productivity in manufacturing down 2.8% in 2015, largest decline since 2012
- Multifactor productivity in manufacturing down 1.0% in 2014, third decline in four years
- Multifactor productivity in manufacturing down 0.7% in 2013, third consecutive decline
- Multifactor productivity in manufacturing up 0.6% in 2012, faster rate than in 2011
- Multifactor productivity in manufacturing increases 0.8% in 2011, slower rate than in 2010
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 135 (Thursday, July 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34549-34550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16946]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the California Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the 
California Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will 
convene on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 at 9 a.m. and adjourn at noon at 
Conference Room 1258-1A, 300 Federal Building, 300 N. Los Angeles St., 
Los Angeles, California. The purpose of the meeting is for the 
Committee to plan activities for fiscal year 2010.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the regional office by September 11, 2009. 
The address is U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles 
St., Suite 4333, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Persons wishing to e-mail their 
comments, or to present their comments verbally at the meeting, or who 
desire additional information should contact Peter Minarik, Regional 
Director, Western Regional Office, at (213) 894-

[[Page 34550]]

3437 or 800-877-8339 for individuals who are deaf, hearing impaired, 
and/or have speech disabilities or by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1a6a7773747b6873715a6f69797968347d756c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2c5c4145424d5e45476c595f4f4f5e024b435a">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require 
the services of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional 
Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the 
meeting.
    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced 
at the Western Regional Office, as they become available, both before 
and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory 
committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Western Regional Office at the above 
e-mail or street address.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated in Washington, DC, July 13, 2009.
Peter Minarik,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. E9-16946 Filed 7-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Theundersigned officer of Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”),hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

(i)                                     the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d),as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(ii)                                  the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:   May 9,  2005 | ** ** |
|------------------------------------------|------------|
|                                     | By:        | **/s/  Allen Chao** |
| ** **                               | ** ** | **Allen Chao, Ph.D.** |
|                                     |       | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                     |       | (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

 

The foregoing certificationis being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by referenceinto any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof,regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5147 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5147

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
23055 Sherman Way in West Hills, California, as the ``Evan Asa Ashcraft 
                         Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 23055 
Sherman Way in West Hills, California, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Evan Asa Ashcraft Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Evan Asa Ashcraft Post 
Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
Case 2:11-cv-00602-SRC -MAS Document 4 Filed 03/29/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 10
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 368
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 2 of 19 PageID: 369
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 3 of 19 PageID: 370
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 4 of 19 PageID: 371
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 5 of 19 PageID: 372
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 6 of 19 PageID: 373
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 7 of 19 PageID: 374
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 8 of 19 PageID: 375
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 9 of 19 PageID: 376
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 10 of 19 PageID: 377
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 11 of 19 PageID: 378
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 12 of 19 PageID: 379
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 13 of 19 PageID: 380
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 14 of 19 PageID: 381
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 15 of 19 PageID: 382
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 16 of 19 PageID: 383
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 17 of 19 PageID: 384
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 18 of 19 PageID: 385
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 70 Filed 06/15/11 Page 19 of 19 PageID: 386
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of 
American River Bankshares
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 
regarding Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007

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), each of the
undersigned officers of American River Bankshares, a California corporation
(the Company), does hereby certify that:

| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1. | The
 Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007
 (the Form 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
| | 2. | Information
 contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
 financial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                    

| |                       |     |                          |                                       
| | --------------------- | --- | ------------------------ | --------------------------------------
| | Dated: March
 5, 2008 | By: | /s/ DAVID T.
 TABER     
| |                       |     |                          |                                       
| |                       |     |                          | David T.
 Taber                       
| |                       |     |                          | President
 and Chief Executive Officer
| |                       |     |                          |                                       
| | Dated: March
 5, 2008 | By: | /s/ MITCHELL
 A. DERENZO
| |                       |     |                          |                                       
| |                       |     |                          | Mitchell A.
 Derenzo                  
| |                       |     |                          | Executive
 Vice President and         
| |                       |     |                          | Chief
 Financial Officer              

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

101

---