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

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo 

 

No. 07-23-00252-CR 

 

KENDALL BATCHELOR, APPELLANT 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

On Appeal from the 451st District Court 

Kendall County, Texas1 

Trial Court No. 8946, Honorable Kirsten B. Cohoon, Presiding 

August 17, 2023 

ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND 

Before PARKER and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ. 

Appellant, Kendall Batchelor, appeals her conviction for intoxicated manslaughter2

and sentence to twenty years’ confinement. The appellate record was originally due July 

24, 2023. The clerk’s record was filed by this deadline. However, the reporter’s record 

was not timely filed because Appellant did not request preparation or make payment 

1 Originally appealed to the Fourth Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by 

the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001.

2 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 49.08(b).
2

arrangements for the record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.2; 35.3(b)(2), (3). By letter of July 

20, 2023, we directed Appellant to request preparation of the record and make any 

necessary payment arrangements by July 31 or we would remand the cause to the trial 

court for further proceedings. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(a)(2). The reporter has notified 

the Court that Appellant has not requested preparation of the record to date. And,

Appellant has had no further communication with this Court.

Accordingly, we abate the appeal and remand the cause to the trial court to

determine the following:

1. whether Appellant still desires to prosecute the appeal;

2. whether Appellant is indigent;

3. why Appellant has not timely requested preparation of the reporter’s record;

4. whether Appellant is entitled to have the reporter’s record furnished without 

charge pursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.2;

5. if Appellant is not entitled to have the reporter’s record furnished without 

charge, the date appellant will make acceptable payment arrangements for 

the reporter’s record;

6. whether Appellant’s counsel has abandoned the appeal;

7. whether Appellant has been denied the effective assistance of counsel; and

8. whether new counsel should be appointed.

The trial court is also directed to enter such orders necessary to address the 

aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters in a 

supplemental record and cause that record to be filed with this Court by September 18, 

2023. If it is determined that Appellant desires to proceed with the appeal, is indigent, 

and has been denied the effective assistance of counsel, the trial court may appoint new 
3

counsel; the name, address, email address, phone number, and state bar number of any 

newly appointed counsel shall be included in the aforementioned findings. 

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

___________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

May 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

133899 (23) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

LEWIS DOUGLAS, #137855 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 133899 

 CoA: 273659 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 

Defendant-Appellee. 

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it 

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be 

liable for filing fees. 

Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pay to the 

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $74.00, shall submit a copy of this order 

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned 

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the appeal not being 

filed in this Court. 

If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly 

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of 

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of 

$301.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

 Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in this 

Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and 

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order. 

jm 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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 29, 2007 

Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2001 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2001

   To provide that certain games of chance conducted by a nonprofit 
 organization not be treated as an unrelated trade or business of such 
                             organization.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 1993

 Mr. Hoagland (for himself, Mr. Hoyer, and Mr. Peterson of Minnesota) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide that certain games of chance conducted by a nonprofit 
 organization not be treated as an unrelated trade or business of such 
                             organization.

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

SECTION 1. THE CONDUCTING OF CERTAIN GAMES OF CHANCE NOT TREATED AS 
              UNRELATED TRADE OR BUSINESS.

    (a) Section 1834 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 is repealed for 
games conducted after October 22, 1986, and subparagraph (A) of section 
311(a)(3) of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 shall be applied and 
administered as if such section 1834 (and the amendments made by such 
section 1834) had not been enacted.
    (b) If refund or credit of any overpayment of tax resulting from 
the application of subsection (a) is prevented at any time before the 
close of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
this Act by the operation of any law or rule of law (including res 
judicata), refund or credit of such overpayment (to the extent 
attributable to the application of subsection (a)) may, nevertheless, 
be made or allowed if claim therefor is filed before the close of such 
1-year period.

                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

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.

 July 25, 2017

a0717

Order 

Clerk

July 25, 2017

154342 & (36)

In re DAWSON

________________________________________

DION PATRICK DAWSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 154342

COA: 331589

WAYNE CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to add issue is GRANTED. The application for 

leave to appeal the June 16, 2016 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.

WILDER, J., did not participate because he was on the Court of Appeals panel.
#### NEW VINITA HARDWARE CO. *et al.*v. PORTER.

No. 3974.

Opinion Filed January 26, 1915.

(146 Pac. 14.)

*1.*APPEAL AND ERROR — Presentation for Review — Rulings on Evidence — Brief. The action of the lower court in the exclusion or admission of evidence will not be reviewed by the Supreme Court, unless the evidence complained of is set out in the brief of the plaintiff in error, as required by rule 25 (38 Okla. x, 137 Pac. xi,) although properly assigned as error.

2. APPEAL AND ERROR — Presentation for Review — Instructions— Brief. Where plaintiff in error fails to comply with rule 25 (38 Okla. x, 137 Pac. xi,) and set forth the instructions complained of in totidem verbis, alleged error in giving or refusing the same will not be considered here.

3. APPEAL AND ERROR — Dismissal—iBrief. Where plaintiff in error fails to comply with rule 25 (38 Okla. x, 137 Pac. xi,) relative to briefing, the appeal may be dismissed.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

*471
      *Error from County Court, Craig County; 8. F. Park, Judge.*

Action by H. L. Porter against the New Vinita Hardware Company and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.

Appeal dismissed.

*Theo. D. Frear,*for plaintiff in error.

*E. M. Probasco*and *A. D. Bennett,*for defendant in error.

BROWN, J.

Rule 25 (38 Okla. x, 137 Pac. xi), relative to briefing a case for this court by plaintiff in error, among other things, provides:

> “Where a party complains on account of the admission or rejection of testimony, he shall set out in his brief the full substance of the testimony, to the admission or rejection of which he objects, stating specifically his objection thereto. Also, where a party complains of instructions given or refused, he shall set out *in iotidem ven'bis*in his brief separately the portions to which he objects or may save exceptions.”

The brief filed by plaintiff in error in this case fails to comply with either of the provisions of the above-quoted portion of said rule; and, while there are numerous assignments of error, a correct determination of the questions involved cannot be reached without an examination of the evidence and instructions from the record itself. The purpose of the above rule is to require counsel to present such errors in such manner as to render unnecessary an examination of the record in determining the ease. See *Avants v. Bruner,*39 Okla. 730, 136 Pac. 593; *Collier v. Gannon,*40 Okla. 275, 137 Pac. 1179; *St. L. & S. R. Co. v. Shepard,*40 Okla. 589, 139 Pac. 833; *Kelley v. State,*40 Okla. 355, 138 Pac. 167.

The appeal will therefore be dismissed.

All the Justices concur.
# Subscriber Updates

## Breadcrumb

-  Newsroom 
-                       Subscriber Updates                  

Subscriber Updates

### By Date (1)

                      - 2019(1)

### By Program/Office (17)

                      - (-)The Emergency Food Assistance Program(1)
                      - Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP)(1)
                      - Child and Adult Care Food Program(4)
                      - Commodity Supplemental Food Program(1)
                      - Food Distribution & Emergency Assistance(1)
                      - Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations(2)
                      - Meals for Schools and Childcare(3)
                      - National School Lunch Program(6)
                      - School Breakfast Program(5)
                      - Special Milk Program(2)
                      - Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)(6)
                      - Summer EBT(1)
                      - Summer Food Service Program(5)
                      - Summer Nutrition Programs(1)
                      - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)(10)
                      - Team Nutrition(1)
                      - The Patrick Leahy Farm to School Program(1)

### By Initiatives (0)

### By Region (0)

### By Language (1)

                      - English(1)

Reset

New Rule to Enhance Customer Service and Link Farms to Food Banks in TEFAP 

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) is a federal program that helps supplement the diets of low-income Americans by providing them with emergency food assistance at no cost through food banks and pantries. In recent years, a number of states have recognized the value of supporting donations from local farmers to their food bank networks – commonly known as Farm to Food Bank Projects.  

Page updated: April 26, 2024
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                       THERMA-WAVE, INC. CERTIFICATION OF
         PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Boris Lipkin, in my capacity as President and Chief Executive Officer of
Therma-Wave, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Therma-Wave"), and in connection
with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed by Therma-Wave with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on February 11, 2004 (the "Report"), hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

2.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Therma-Wave.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Therma-Wave and will be retained
by Therma-Wave and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certification as of the
11th day of February 2004.

                                        /s/ Boris Lipkin
                                        Boris Lipkin
                                        President and Chief Executive
                                        Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by Therma-Wave as
part of the report or as a separate disclosure document for purposes of Section
18 or any other provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
rom S794

(Rev. November 1986)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Statement by Person(s) Receiving Gambling Winnings OMB No. 1545-0239

> For additional instructions for Form 5754, see Expires 7-31-89

Instructions for Forms 1099, 1098, 5498, 1096, and W-2G.

Date won Type of winnings Game number Machine number Race number
Person to Whom Winnings Are Paid
Name Address
Taxpayer identification number Other !.D. ‘Amount recewed __|Federalincome tax withheld

GEM Persons to Whom Winning Payments Are Taxable

Name

Taxpayer
identification number

Winnings from

Address Amount won identical wagers

Under penalties of perjury, | declare that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the names, addresses, and taxpayer identification numbers that | have furnished correctly identify me as
the recipient of this payment and correctly identify each person entitled to any part of this payment and any payments from identical wagers.

Signature >

Date >

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see back of form.

Form 5754 (Rev. 11-86)


Form 5754 (Rev. 11-86)

Page 2

Persons to Whom Winning Payments Are Taxable (Continued)

Name Taxpayer
identification number

Winnings from

Address ‘Amount won
identical wagers

Paperwork Reduction Act Notice.—We ask for this information to
carry out the Internal Revenue laws of the United States. We need it
to ensure that taxpayers are complying with these laws and to allow
us to figure and collect the right amount of tax. You are required to
give us this information.

General Information.—If any person other than the person
receiving gambling winnings that are subject to withholding or
reporting requirements is entitled to part of the winnings, this form
must be completed by the person to whom the winnings are paid
(recipient). If the recipient is not one of the winners, that person
must fill in his or her name, address, and taxpayer identification
number in Part | and then list in Part Il the names, addresses,
taxpayer identification numbers, winnings, and any additional

winnings from identical wagers that each of the other persons is
entitled to receive. If the recipient is also one of the winners, that
person’s name, winnings, and any additional winnings from identical
wagers should also appear in Part II. The taxpayer identification
number for an individual is the social security number; for all others it
is the employer identification number. If Federal income tax is
withheld, the recipient must sign the statement at the bottom of the
form before returning it to the payer. The payer must provide the
recipient a Form W-2G or similar statement at the time of the
payment or no later than January 31 of the year following the year of
the winnings.

The payer should keep this form for 4 years from the date of

payment of the winnings and must make it available to the Internal
Revenue Service upon request during that period.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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; and
 (2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at and for
the periods indicated.
  /s/ Cameron R. NelsonCameron R. NelsonVice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) 37
Letter Agreement Between Meda, Arius, Arius Two and BDSI



 Exhibit 10.17 
 August 2, 2006 
 Meda AB 
 Box 906 
 Pipers vag 2A 
 17009 
 Solna, Sweden 
 Attention: Anders Lonners, CEO 
 Dear Anders: 
 This letter will confirm our agreement with Meda that neither BDSI, Arius nor Arius Two will
take any action to terminate, by mutual agreement with a third party, any agreement which would cause a termination of Meda’s rights under the License and Development Agreement and each document, instrument, agreement, license and/or sublicense
related thereto, unless provision is made for Meda’s rights under the License and Development Agreement to continue undisturbed. 
  

			
	Very Truly Yours,
	
	BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Mark A. Sirgo

	
	Arius Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Mark A. Sirgo

	
	Arius Two, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Mark A. Sirgo
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         197,767                 197,767
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,179,008               3,179,008
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,179,008               3,179,008
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,179,008               3,179,008
<SALES>                                         15,196                 913,344
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                15,196                 913,344
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,602                  39,303
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,594                 874,041
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,594                 874,041
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,594                 874,041
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>