alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## NO. 12

- 14

- 00296

- CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

DAVID MARK DAVIS II,

APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE §

§

§ APPEA L FROM THE

COUNTY COURT AT LAW # 2

ANGELINA COUNTY, TEX AS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

David Mark Davis II attempts to appeal his conviction for speeding, for which he was

assessed a fine of seventy

- five dollars. Article 4.03 of the code of criminal procedure determines

our jurisdiction in this matter. It provides as follows:

The Courts of Appeals shall have appellate jurisdiction coextensive with the limits of their

respective districts in all criminal cases except those in which the death penalty has been a ssessed.

This Article shall not be so construed as to embrace any case which has been appealed from any

inferior court to the county court, the county criminal court, or county court at law, in which the

fine imposed or affirmed by the county court, the co unty criminal court or county court at law

does not exceed one hundred dollars, unless the sole issue is the constitutionality of the statute or

ordinance on which the conviction is based.

T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 4.03 (West Supp. 2014). Appellan t appealed from a municipal

court to a county court at law. The county court at law imposed a fine that does not exceed one

hundred dollars. Appellant does not complain that the statute on which his conviction was based

is unconstitutional. Therefore, w e have no jurisdiction over this appeal.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. 1

1 Neither party raised the jurisdictional issue in its brief. However, we are required to address a lack of

jurisdiction sua sponte if the parties do not raise the issue. Solis v. State , 890 S.W.2d 518, 520 (Tex. App.

— Dallas

1994, no pet .).2 J AMES T. W ORTHEN

Chief Justice

Opinion delivered May 29, 2015

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

( DO NOT PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

MAY 29 , 2015

NO. 12

- 14

- 00296

- CR

DAVID MARK DAVIS II,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

Appeal from t he County Court at Law No 2

of Angelina County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 14

- 1048)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same

being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this court is without jurisdiction of the

appeal, and that t he appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that

this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction ; and that this decision

be certified to the court below for observance.

J ames T. Wort hen , Chief Justice

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 778 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 778

 To prohibit the provision of certain foreign assistance to countries 
   receiving certain detainees transferred from United States Naval 
                     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 18, 2015

 Mr. Cotton (for himself, Mr. Tillis, Mrs. Ernst, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. 
   Lankford) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the provision of certain foreign assistance to countries 
   receiving certain detainees transferred from United States Naval 
                     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Guantanamo Bay Recidivism Prevention 
Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN FOREIGN ASSISTANCE FOR COUNTRIES 
              RECEIVING CERTAIN DETAINEES TRANSFERRED FROM UNITED 
              STATES NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA.

    (a) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
assistance may not be provided under any Act specified in subsection 
(b) to a foreign country if--
            (1) the country received an individual who was released or 
        transferred from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, 
        Cuba, on or after February 1, 2015; and
            (2) after the date of such release or transfer, the 
        individual is included in a report under section 319 of the 
        Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32; 123 
        Stat. 1874; 10 U.S.C. 801 note) as described by subsection 
        (c)(4) of that section.
    (b) Covered Acts.--The Acts specified in this subsection are the 
following:
            (1) The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151 et 
        seq.).
            (2) The Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.).
    (c) Commencement of Applicability of Prohibition.--The prohibition 
in subsection (a) shall commence applying to a foreign country on the 
date of the first report described in subsection (a)(2) that includes 
any individual described in subsection (a)(1) who was received by the 
country on or after February 1, 2015.
    (d) Duration of Applicability of Prohibition.--The prohibition in 
subsection (a) shall cease with respect to a foreign country on the 
date that is five years after the date of the commencement of the 
applicability of the prohibition to the country under subsection (c).
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                       4,902,900
<SECURITIES>                                 5,009,963
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,627,471
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (641,945)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            20,980,645
<PP&E>                                       6,076,463
<DEPRECIATION>                             (4,511,172)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              25,927,665
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,326,102
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,534
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                25,927,665
<SALES>                                      3,802,706
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,981,411
<CGS>                                        1,050,585
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,607,431
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 530
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                448,116
<INCOME-TAX>                                    45,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            403,116
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   403,116
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE ALONSO TENA

- CISNEROS,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 20

- 70261

Agency No. A089

- 926

- 400

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 15 , 2022 * *

Before: SILVERMAN

, WATFORD , and FORREST , Circuit Judges.

Jose Alonso Tena

- Cisneros, a native and citizen of Mexico

, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.

Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 23 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 70261

discretio n the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS , 321 F.3d 889, 894

(9th Cir. 2003). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Tena

- Cisneros’ motion to

reopen as untimely, where it was filed more than nine years after the order of

removal became final, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i), and Tena

- Cisneros failed

to establish that he acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling

, see

Iturribarria , 321 F.3d at 897 (equitable tolling is available “when a petitioner is

prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the pe titioner

acts with due diligence”)

.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s determination not to reopen

proceedings sua sponte. See Bonilla v. Lynch , 840 F.3d 575, 588 (9th Cir. 2016)

(“[T]his court has jurisdiction to review Board decisions denying sua sponte

reopening for the limited purpose of reviewing the reasoning behind the decisions

for legal or constitutional error.”)

.
The temporary stay of r emoval remains in place until issuance of the

mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part

.
EXHIBIT
10.3

     

    AMENDMENT
TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     

    Amendment
to Employment Agreement dated November 5, 2007, as amended in December 17, 2008,
between Pharma-Bio Serv, Inc., hereinafter ("Company") and Pedro J. Lasanta
("Executive").

    


    WHEREAS, given the current
global and local economic and industry forecasts for 2009, the Company is
implementing various cost containment strategies to mitigate the current market
downward volume trend, among others, adjust compensation packages of its
management team.

    


    NOW THEREFORE in exchange for
the mutual promises and undertakings herein, the parties voluntarily agree as
follows:

    


    
      	
              1.  
       

            	
              Executive's
      compensation pursuant to paragraph 3(a) of that certain Employment
      Agreement dated November 5, 2007, as amended is hereby modified and
      amended so as to decrease Executive's annual salary, as of March 1, 2009,
      from $110,000 to $106,000 per annum. Salary shall be paid in such
      installments as the Company regularly pays its executive officers, but not
      less frequently than semi-monthly. Executive’s salary will be revised
      annually based upon performance evaluation following Company’s performance
      review process and subject to the financial situation of the
      Company.

            


    

    


    
      	
              2. 
        

            	
              Executive's
      monthly car allowance of $500 pursuant to paragraph 3(b) (i) of that
      certain Employment Agreement dated November 5, 2007, as amended, is hereby
      eliminated effective March 1, 2009.

            


    

    


    In all
other respects the Employment Agreement dated November 5, 2007, as amended,
shall remain in full force and effect and unaltered.

    


    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
parties have executed this Agreement in Dorado, Puerto Rico, this 11th day of
March, 2009.

    


    PHARMA-BIO
SERV, INC.

    


    


    By:/s/ Elizabeth
Plaza

    Name:
Elizabeth Plaza

    Title:
President & CEO

    


    EXECUTIVE:

    


    /s/s Pedro J
Lasanta

    Name:
Pedro J Lasanta

    Title:
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S BALANCE SHEET, STATEMENT OF INCOME, AND STATEMENT OF CASH FLOW AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,106,919
<ALLOWANCES>                                   690,008
<INVENTORY>                                  1,759,716
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,347,786
<PP&E>                                     137,214,781
<DEPRECIATION>                              83,112,774
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              91,330,291
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,527,206
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       156,245
<OTHER-SE>                                (35,303,055)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                91,330,291
<SALES>                                      1,985,345
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            31,526,310
<CGS>                                        1,557,860
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,679,249
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,027,905
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                57,976
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,392,314
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,992,395)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (678,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,314,395)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              1,863,020
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,177,415)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 702 

To strengthen the prohibitions on insider trading, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 11, 2015 

Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. MENENDEZ) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To strengthen the prohibitions on insider trading, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stop Illegal Insider 

5 Trading Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. STRENGTHENING THE PROHIBITION ON INSIDER 

7 TRADING. 

8 Section 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

9 (15 U.S.C. 78j) is amended— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•S 702 IS

1 (1) in the matter immediately preceding the 

2 flush text at the end of the section, by inserting at 

3 the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(d)(1)(A) To purchase, sell, or cause the purchase 

5 or sale of any security on the basis of material information 

6 that the person knows or has reason to know is not pub7 licly available. 

8 ‘‘(B) To knowingly or recklessly communicate mate9 rial information that the person knows or has reason to 

10 know is not publicly available to any other person under 

11 circumstances in which it is reasonably foreseeable that 

12 such communication is likely to result in a violation of sub13 paragraph (A). 

14 ‘‘(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘not 

15 publicly available’ shall not include information that the 

16 person has independently developed from publicly available 

17 sources. 

18 ‘‘(3) The Commission may, by rule, exempt any per19 son, transaction, or communication, or any class of per20 sons, transactions, or communications from the prohibi21 tions under this subsection, if the Commission determines 

22 that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the 

23 public interest and consistent with the protection of inves24 tors. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

3 

•S 702 IS

1 ‘‘(4) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to 

2 affect liability under subsection (b).’’; and 

3 (2) in the flush text at the end of the section— 

4 (A) by striking ‘‘Rules promulgated’’ and 

5 inserting ‘‘Subsection (d) and rules promul6 gated’’; and 

7 (B) by inserting ‘‘or subsection (d)’’ after 

8 ‘‘subsection (b)’’ each place that term appears. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Union membership of wage and salary workers by demographic group, 2008


Demographic		       Percent union members

All workers				12.4
Men					13.4
Women					11.4
White					12.2
Black or African American		14.5
Asian					10.6
Hispanic or Latino ethnicity		10.6
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

IN RE DEVICOR MEDICAL PRODUCTS, INC. 

____________________ 

2011-1414 

(REEXAMINATION NO. 90/008,824) 

______________________

 

 Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT 

______________________ 

MARK P. LEVY, Thompson Hine LLP, of Dayton, Ohio 

argued for appellant. 

SYDNEY O. JOHNSON, JR., Associate Solicitor, United 

States Patent & Trademark Office, of Alexandria, 

Virginia, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were 

RAYMOND T. CHEN, Solicitor and SCOTT C. WEIDENFELLER, 

Associate Solicitor. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, LOURIE, and PROST, Circuit 

Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

March 14, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly

 Date Jan Horbaly 

 Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 902 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 902

To prohibit trespassing on critical infrastructure used in or affecting 
           interstate commerce to commit a criminal offense.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 13, 2015

  Mr. Schumer introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit trespassing on critical infrastructure used in or affecting 
           interstate commerce to commit a criminal offense.

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

SECTION 1. TRESPASSING ON CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE USED IN OR AFFECTING 
              INTERSTATE COMMERCE TO COMMIT CRIME.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 65 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1370. Trespassing on critical infrastructure used in or 
              affecting interstate commerce to commit crime
    ``(a) Definition.--In this section, the term `critical 
infrastructure'--
            ``(1) means physical systems and assets so vital to the 
        United States that the incapacity or destruction of such 
        systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on 
        security, national economic security, national public health or 
        safety, or any combination of those matters; and
            ``(2) includes a landmark, structure, or other object--
                    ``(A) declared to be a national monument under 
                section 2 of the Act of June 8, 1906 (commonly known as 
                the `Antiquities Act of 1906') (16 U.S.C. 431); or
                    ``(B) established as a national monument by an Act 
                of Congress.
    ``(b) Prohibition.--It shall be unlawful to knowingly go on any 
critical infrastructure used in or affecting interstate commerce, with 
intent to commit a criminal offense.
    ``(c) Penalty.--Any person who violates subsection (b) shall be 
fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or 
both.''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
chapter 65 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following:

``1370. Trespassing on critical infrastructure used in or affecting 
                            interstate commerce to commit crime.''.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 10104]

                    By virtue of the authority vested in me as the Secretary of State, including pursuant to section 7045(a)(4)(A) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2017 (Div. J, Pub. L. 115-31), I hereby certify that the central government of El Salvador is taking effective steps, which are in addition to those steps taken since the certification                           ( print page 41088)                        and report submitted during the prior year, to:                
    - Inform its citizens of the dangers of the journey to the southwest border of the United States;
    - combat human smuggling and trafficking;
    - improve border security, including to prevent illegal migration, human smuggling and trafficking, and trafficking of illicit drugs and other contraband; and
    - cooperate with United States Government agencies and other governments in the region to facilitate the return, repatriation, and reintegration of illegal migrants arriving at the southwest border of the United States who do not qualify for asylum, consistent with international law.

                    This certification shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                     and, along with the accompanying Memorandum of Justification, shall be reported to Congress.                

Dated: August 22, 2017.

Rex W. Tillerson,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2017-18303 Filed 8-28-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4710-29-P