alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

August 5, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 0033 9

- CR

Elias Esequiel VASQUEZ

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas Trial Court No. 11

- CRS

- 27 2 Honorable Ana Lisa Garza, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s brief was originally due on April 9, 2014. Appellant has been granted three extensions of time

— for a total of 110 days

— in which to file the brief. Our last order stated that no further extensions of time would be granted. Despite this admoni tion, appellant has filed a fourth motion for extension of time requesting an additional 14

- day extension.

The motion is GRANTED. We ORDER appellant’s attorney to file the appellant’s brief on or before August 13, 2014. No further extensions of time will be considered. If appellant’s brief is not filed by that date, we will abate this appeal to the trial court for an abandonment hearing. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(b)(2). Contempt proceedings may also be initiated against appellant’s attorney. Id. 38.8(b )(4).

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of August, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
^•.;iH!^bNTOF 

BEFORE THE ;,,, , ,^, 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ^-1- 8 p 1:33 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

WASHINGTON. DC. 

Supplement to the Application of 

VIGOJET SA.DE.CV DOCKET No. OST 

For an exemption Pursuant to 

49 U.S.C 40109 

SUPPLEMENT TO THE APPLICATION 

FOR VIGOJET SA.DE.CV FOR THE 

REINSTATEMENT OF AN EXEMPTION 

Communications concerning this document may be sent to: 

Vigo Jet SA.DE.CV 

C/0 Robert Sanders 

Plan De Guadalupe Airport 

Hanger 44 

Ramos Arizpe, Mexico 

25900 

Designated Representitive for 

Vigo Jet SA.DE.CV 

February 15, 2012 
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

WASHINGTON. DC. 

Supplement to the Application of 

VIGOJET SA.DE.CV DOCKET No. OST 

For an exemption Pursuant to 

49 U.S.C 40109 

SUPPLEMENT TO THE APPLICATION 

FOR VIGOJET SA.DE.CV FOR THE 

REINSTATEMENT OF AN EXEMPTION 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 40109 and the departments regulations. Vigo Jet 

SA. DE. CV hereby applies for reinstatement of its exemption from 49 U.S.C. 41301 which authorizes 

Vigo Jet to engage in charter foreign air transportation of persons, ambulance flights, and cargo 

between the United States and Mexico with small aircraft and subject to prior Department approval, 

between other countries and the United States. Vigo Jet also requests reinstatement of its stopover 

privileges and relief from any requirement to obtain advanced approval for each Mexican and U.S. flight. 

The department has granted the above authority to Vigo Jet by Notice of Action Taken dated 

September 08, 2009, Vigo Jet requests that this authority, which expired on September 08, 2011 be 

reinstated for a period of two years or alternatively for a period of at least one year. 
In support of this application, Vigo Jet states as follows; 

VIGOJET SA.DE.CV failed to renew its application in September 2011 because an oversight in 

their acministrative offices. VIGOJET SA.DE.CV had several administrative personnel transfer to 

other positic ns and they failed to notify their replacements that a renewal of DOT should have 

been done well before September 08, 2011 when it expired. 

Since the initial application and fitness review there were no significant changes and Vigo Jet 

intends to operate as it had when it had the authority to do so. The ownership and operation 

has not changed. 

WHEREFORE. Vigo Jet respectfully requests reinstatement of its authority to engage in charter 

foreign air transportation of persons, ambulance and cargo with small aircraft as set forth herein, and 

such other relief as may be in the public interest. 

Respectfully submttted by. 

Robert Sanders 

Designated Representative 

February 15, 2012
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 106

Expressing the appreciation and thanks of the House of Representatives

for the extraordinary efforts of the United States Capitol Police during

the impeachment proceedings.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 10, 1999

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania (for himself, Mr. DELAY, Mr. CUNNINGHAM,

Mr. HOLDEN, Mrs. MORELLA, Mr. SAXTON, Mr. TRAFICANT, Mr.

UNDERWOOD, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. BROWN

of California, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mr. SHOWS, Mr. SALMON, Mr. WOLF,

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska, Mr. STUMP,

Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey, Mrs. KELLY, Mr. NEY, Mr. GREEN of

Texas, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. LARGENT, Mr. BARR of Georgia, Mr.

MCGOVERN, Mr. LUTHER, Mr. COYNE, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr. TANCREDO,

Mr. LATHAM, Mr. FOLEY, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. BALLENGER, Ms.

LOFGREN, Mr. REYES, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. BLILEY, Mr. GIBBONS, Mr.

RAMSTAD, Mr. WALSH, Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma, Mr. STEARNS, Mr.

MCNULTY, Mr. EWING, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. GOODE, Mr. WYNN, Mr.

PORTMAN, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. DAVIS of Florida, Mr. FOSSELLA, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mrs. CHENOWETH, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr.

FROST, Mr. HYDE, Mr. HAYWORTH, Mr. ROGAN, Mr. DAVIS of Virginia,

and Mr. COLLINS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

RESOLUTION

Expressing the appreciation and thanks of the House of

Representatives for the extraordinary efforts of the

United States Capitol Police during the impeachment

proceedings.
2

•HRES 106 IH

Whereas the United States Capitol Police provide around the

clock protection of Members of Congress, staff, visitors,

and the United States Capitol grounds;

Whereas United States Capitol Police officers have worked

countless hours outside of their normal shifts since the

beginning of the impeachment proceedings, often working

double shifts;

Whereas United States Capitol Police officers have dutifully

guarded all of the critical documents and tapes that were

pertinent to the trial;

Whereas United States Capitol Police officers traveled outside of Capitol Hill to ensure the protection of Members

of Congress and witnesses of the trial during depositions;

and

Whereas the United States Capitol Police force has increased

the level of security at the United States Capitol during

the impeachment trial: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Members of the House of Rep2 resentatives express their appreciation and thanks to the

3 United States Capitol Police officers for their hard work

4 and long hours throughout the impeachment proceedings.

Æ
1

Filed 10/28/13 P. v. Leen CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Trinity)

----

THE PEOP LE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

DOVIE DEWDROP LEEN,

Defendant and Appellant. C073535

(Super. Ct. No. 11F0207A)

In November 2011, defendant Dovie Dewdrop Leen threatened to commit a crime

that would result in death or great bodily injury. He intended that his statement be taken

as a threat, and the victim feared for his safety or the safety of his family. Because the

matter was resolved by plea and defendant waived referral to the probation department,

our statement of facts is taken from the amended information.

Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422) and admitted two

prior serious or vio lent felony convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)

- (i), 1170.12).

In exchange, two related counts and several allegations were dismissed. A great bodily2

injury allegation was dismissed with a Harvey waiver for restitution. ( People v. Harvey

(1979) 2 5 Cal.3d 754.)

Defendant was sentenced to prison for a stipulated term of 25 years to life,

awarded 469 days’ custody credit and 469 days’ conduct credit, and ordered to pay a

$6,000 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4), a $6,000 restitution fine suspen ded unless

parole is revoked (Pen. Code, § 1202.45), a $40 court operations fee (Pen. Code,

§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), and a $30 court facilities assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373).

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an ope ning

brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and

determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. ( People v. Wende (1979)

25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a s upplemental

brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed,

and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination

of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more

favorable to defendant.



### D ISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

HULL , J.

We concur:

BLEASE , Acting P. J.

MURRAY , J.
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

MAY 21 2002

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

CURTIS LEE COOLEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DENISE NAU, Laramie County Judge,

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 02-8006

(D. Ct. No. 01-CV-219)

(D. Wyoming)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before TACHA, Chief Circuit Judge, EBEL, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material

assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th

Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Pro se plaintiff Curtis Cooley appeals the dismissal of his civil rights

lawsuit against Laramie County Judge Denise Nau. Mr. Cooley alleged that Judge

Nau mistakenly found that he had violated the conditions of his probation, and
- 2 -

wrongfully confined him to a mental institution. Mr. Cooley sought $43 million

in damages. The district court dismissed the complaint as barred by absolute

judicial immunity. This appeal followed.

Judges are entitled to absolute immunity from civil liability for judicial

acts, “unless committed in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.” Whitesel v.

Sengenberger, 222 F.3d 861, 867 (10th Cir. 2000). A judge does not act in the

clear absence of all jurisdiction even if she acted in error, maliciously, or in

excess of her authority. Id. Having reviewed the record, we agree with the

district court that Judge Nau did not act in the clear absence of all jurisdiction. 

We therefore AFFIRM the ruling of the district court.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT,

Deanell Reece Tacha

Circuit Judge
### §3786. Use or release restriction: definition

In this subchapter, the term "use or release restriction", with respect to technical data delivered to the United States under a contract subject to this section, means a restriction by the contractor or subcontractor on the right of the United States—

(1) to use such technical data; or

(2) to release or disclose such technical data to persons outside the Government or permit the use of such technical data by persons outside the Government.

(Added and amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title XVIII, §1833(g), (m), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4231, 4233.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

The text of subsec. (j) of section 2321 of this title, which was transferred to this section and amended by Pub. L. 116–283, §1833(m), was based on Pub. L. 100–26, §7(a)(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 277; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XII, §1231(6), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1160; Pub. L. 103–355, title VIII, §8106(b)(1), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3393.

#### Prior Provisions

Prior sections 3786 and 3787 were repealed by Pub. L. 96–513, title II, §213, title VII, §701, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2885, 2955, effective Sept. 15, 1981.

Section 3786, acts Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 219; July 12, 1960, Pub. L. 86–616, §2(a), 74 Stat. 387, authorized Secretary of the Army, at any time during proceedings under this chapter and before removal of an officer from active list of Regular Army, to grant that officer's request for voluntary retirement, if he is otherwise qualified therefor, or for honorable discharge with severance benefits. See section 1186 of this title.

Section 3787, added Pub. L. 86–616, §2(a), July 12, 1960, 74 Stat. 388, provided that no officer serve on a board under this chapter unless he holds a regular or temporary grade above lieutenant colonel, and is senior in regular grade to, and outranks, any officer considered by board and that no person be a member of more than one board convened under this chapter for same officer. See section 1187 of this title.

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283, §1833(m), transferred subsec. (j) of section 2321 of this title to this section, struck out subsec. (j) designation and heading "Use or Release Restriction Defined" at beginning, and substituted "In this subchapter" for "In this section" in introductory provisions.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section and amendment by Pub. L. 116–283 effective Jan. 1, 2022, with additional provisions for delayed implementation and applicability of existing law, see section 1801(d) of Pub. L. 116–283, set out as an Effective Date of 2021 Amendment note preceding section 3001 of this title.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# Readout of the Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III's Meeting With Australian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence Richard Marles

By Department of Defense

Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder provided the following readout:  

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III met with his Australian counterpart, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence Richard Marles, at the Pentagon today to discuss the United States – Australia alliance.

Against the backdrop of a momentous year for the “Unbreakable Alliance,” the two leaders affirmed their commitment to further deepen defense cooperation, including through defense technology collaboration, force posture initiatives, and the trilateral AUKUS partnership with the United Kingdom. 

They also applauded recent announcements on historic cooperation between Australia and Japan, exchanged views on shared security challenges, and discussed further Alliance initiatives to support a free and open Indo-Pacific.  The two leaders also surveyed the global security environment, sharing perspectives on the situations in Ukraine and the Middle East.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
§ 162.240 Can an agricultural lease provide for negotiated remedies in the event of a violation? ( a ) A lease of tribal agricultural land may provide the tribe with certain negotiated remedies in the event of a lease violation, including the power to terminate the lease. An agricultural lease of individually-owned land may provide the individual Indian landowners with similar remedies, so long as the lease also specifies the manner in which those remedies may be exercised by or on behalf of the landowners.
( b ) The negotiated remedies described in paragraph (a) of this section will apply in addition to the cancellation remedy available to us under § 162.252(c) of this subpart. If the lease specifically authorizes us to exercise any negotiated remedies on behalf of the Indian landowners, the exercise of such remedies may substitute for cancellation.
( c ) An agricultural lease may provide for lease disputes to be resolved in tribal court or any other court of competent jurisdiction, or through arbitration or some other alternative dispute resolution method. We may not be bound by decisions made in such forums, but we will defer to ongoing proceedings, as appropriate, in deciding whether to exercise any of the remedies available to us under § 162.252 of this subpart.
#### § 117.10 Purchase of automotive equipment.

The superintendent may disburse from the surplus funds of an adult Indian not to exceed $2,000 for the purchase of automotive equipment when the Indian agrees in writing to carry property and liability insurance on the automotive equipment and to reimburse his surplus funds account from allowance funds within 24 months. No disbursement of surplus funds for the purchase of automotive equipment shall be made if the fulfillment of the reimbursable agreement will endanger the payment of taxes, insurance or other obligations, or result in the inability of the Indian to meet his current living expenses from allowance funds.
### §2200i. Model authorities

In making determinations under section 2200h of this title, the Secretary of Defense shall use the authorities under chapters 103 and 111 of this title as guides.

(Added Pub. L. 116–92, div. A, title VIII, §860(a), Dec. 20, 2019, 133 Stat. 1514; amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title X, §1081(a)(4)(A), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3870.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283 substituted "§" for "SEC." in section designation.
§ 170.803 To what standards must a Tribal transportation facility be maintained? Subject to availability of funding, Tribal transportation facilities must be maintained under either: ( a ) A standard accepted by BIA or FHWA (as identified in the official Tribal Transportation Program guide on either the BIA transportation Web site at *http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/BIA/OIS/Transportation/index.htm* or the Federal Lands Highway—Tribal Transportation Program Web site at *http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/ttp/guide/*), or
( b ) Another Tribal, Federal, State, or local government maintenance standard negotiated in an ISDEAA road maintenance self-determination contract or self-governance agreement.
#### § 166.225 May a permittee voluntarily assign a leasehold interest under an approved encumbrance?

With our approval, under an approved encumbrance, a permittee voluntarily may assign the leasehold interest to someone other than the holder of a leasehold mortgage if the assignee agrees in writing to be bound by the terms of the permit. A permit may provide the Indian landowners with a right of first refusal on the conveyance of the leasehold interest.
#### Bertha Wild and Charles Pchellas, Respondents, v. Vredenburg & Company, Appellant.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements,-and motion granted, with ten dollars costs to abide event. All concurred.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Pacific Partnership 2016 Departs Indonesia, Completing Final Mission Stop

By Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class William CousinsPacific Partnership Public Affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More Articles/News