alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 292.209 Exceptions from requirements for hydroelectric small power production facilities located at a new dam or diversion. ( a ) The requirements in §§ 292.208(b)(1) through (3) do not apply if: ( 1 ) An application for license or exemption is filed for a project located at a Government dam, as defined in section 3(10) of the Federal Power Act, at which non-Federal hydroelectric development is permissible; or
( 2 ) An application for license or exemption was filed and accepted before October 16, 1986.
( b ) The requirements in §§ 292.208(b) (1) and (3) do not apply if an application for license or exemption was filed before October 16, 1986, and is accepted for filing by the Commission before October 16, 1989.
( c ) The requirements in § 292.208(b)(3) do not apply to an applicant for license or exemption if: ( 1 ) The applicant files a petition pursuant to § 292.210; and
( 2 ) The Commission grants the petition.
( d ) Any application covered by paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section is excepted from the moratorium imposed by section 8(e) of the Electric Consumers Protection Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-495.
[Order 499, 53 FR 27003, July 18, 1988]
MODIFY and AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed June 6 , 2016. 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 15
- 01301
- CR JATERRIAN DIQUAN TAY LOR , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14
- 76025
- P 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang

- Miers, Evans, and Brown Opinion by Justice Lang

- Miers Jaterrian Diquan Taylor waived a jury and pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery of person 65 years or older. See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 29.03(a)(3)(A) (West 2011). The trial court assessed punishment at twenty years’ imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he conclud es 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 advanc e. 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. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se 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).– 2

– We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824,
82 6

– 2 7 (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. Although not an arguable issue, we note the trial court’s judgment incorrectl y reflects there was a plea bargain agreement. The record reflects appellant entered an open plea of guilty to the charges in the indictment. Accordingly, we modify the section of the judgment entitled “terms of plea bargain” to state “open.” See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 43.2(b); Bigley v. State , 865 S.W.2d 26, 27

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State , 813 S.W.2d 526, 529

– 30 (Tex. App.

— Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd). As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 151301F.U05 /Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE– 3

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
JATERRIAN DIQUAN TAYLOR, Appellant
No. 05

- 15

- 01301

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14

- 76025

- P. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang

- Miers. Justices Evans and Brown participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED as f ollows: The section entitled “Terms of Plea Bargain” is modified to show “Open.” As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment.

Judgment entered this 6th day of June, 2016.
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 Annual Report of Golden Enterprises, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John H.
Shannon, 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,
to the best of my knowledge:

     (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.

Dated: August 25, 2003

/s/_John_H._Shannon_______________________
John H. Shannon
Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer

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

                                       47
### §425f. Ascertaining and marking lines of battle

It shall be lawful for the authorities of any State having had troops engaged in said battles of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania Court House, Wilderness, and Chancellorsville, including Salem Church, or in any of said battles, to enter upon the lands and approaches of the Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania County Battle Fields Memorial for the purposes of ascertaining and marking the lines of battle of troops engaged therein: Provided, That before any such lines are permanently designated, the position of the lines and the proposed methods of marking them by monuments, tablets, or otherwise, including the design and inscription for the same, shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Interior, and shall first receive written approval of the Secretary, which approval shall be based upon formal written reports to be made to him in each case by the commissioners of the park: Provided, That no discrimination shall be made against any State as to the manner of designing lines, but any grant made to any State by the Secretary of the Interior may be used by any other State.

(Feb. 14, 1927, ch. 127, §7, 44 Stat. 1093; Ex. Ord. No. 6166, §2, June 10, 1933; Ex. Ord. No. 6228, §1, July 28, 1933.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Transfer of administrative functions of park, see note set out under section 425 of this title.
FROM: THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, COUNTY OF SANDERS.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. DALE GARBERDING, Defendant.

NO. DC-89-06 DECISION

On January 23, 1990, the Defendant was sentenced to Count I, twenty (20 years with ten (10 years suspended plus conditions, and a $10,000 fine for Criminal Possession with Intent to Sell; and Count *21IV, sixteen (16 months in the County Jail for Criminal Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, to run concurrent to Count I, two days credit for time served. Dangerous Designation.

DATED this 23rd day of April, 1990.

On April 23, 990, the Defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The Defendant was present and was represented by Allen M. Ressler, Attorney at raw, from Seattle, Washington. The state was not represented.

Before hearing the application, the Defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also to increase it if such is possible. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

After careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence imposed shall be affirmed.

The reason for the decision is based in part upon the presumption that the sentence imposed is presumed correct, but also because the police report supports the dangerous offender designation. This Court recognizes that the sentencing court should have included reference to the prior felony offense, not because it occurred within five (5 years, but because it shows a pattern of conduct indicating that the Defendant continues to pose a threat to society.

The Honorable Leif B. Erickson, Acting Chairman, dissenting, the Honorable Robert Boyd, Acting Member, the Honorable Ed. McLean, Judges.
Stewart D. Gregg, Second VP & Senior Counsel
Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America
5701 Golden Hills Drive
Minneapolis, MN  55416
(763) 765-2913

April 27, 2004

Board of Directors

Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America
5701 Golden Hills Drive
Minneapolis, MN  55416

Re:     Opinion and Consent of Counsel
        Allianz Life Variable Account B

Dear Sir or Madam:

You have requested my Opinion of Counsel in connection  with the filing with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, of Post-Effective Amendment No.27 to the Registration Statement on Form
N-4 for the  Individual  Deferred  Variable  Annuity  Contracts  to be issued by
Allianz  Life  Insurance  Company of North  America  and its  separate  account,
Allianz Life Variable Account B File No. 333-06709.

I am of the following opinions:

1.   Allianz Life Variable  Account B is a unit investment trust as that term is
     defined in Section  4(2) of the  Investment  Company Act of 1940 (the Act),
     and is currently  registered  with the Securities and Exchange  Commission,
     pursuant to Section 8(a) of the Act.

2.   Upon the acceptance of purchase  payments made by a Contract Owner pursuant
     to a Contract  issued in accordance  with the  Prospectus  contained in the
     Registration  Statement and upon  compliance  with  applicable  law, such a
     Contract  Owner  will  have a  legally-issued,  fully-paid,  non-assessable
     contractual interest under such Contract.

You  may  use  this  opinion  letter,  or  copy  hereof,  as an  exhibit  to the
Registration Statement.

I consent to the  reference to me and to this opinion  under the caption  "Legal
Opinions"  contained in the  Statements of Additional  Information  which form a
part of the Registration Statement.

Sincerely,

ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA

By: /s/ Stewart D.Gregg

    ------------------------------
        Stewart D. Gregg
!""#$%&&




 


'()*+),-.)/0#0#"1,+*+,/21,+*+3+2*+),&10#"4+5

1+,+63,+7,+4+5,1+,*+3,+5

89 )31)+:+4++*+3,:+)+3)4++*++)7

809 /*351.;.+,.,0$<!&!!0/)+,*3*+1+

+,7

89 ),+5,*+,//1*+,,/):7

8=9 4).***3+4,*)*/,++.,.,)33.*3

)):,.3.,3)+1+)1.:.),+,.33)+1+**,+

)+;.+,,.,<!&!!%.3,7

8"9 :+33)):,3.,3)+14+,,*/)

89 ),*.33)+133,)7

8>9 8+9 )4+,),*.33)+1+)+3.+5.33)+17,

8>9 8++9 4).***3+4,*)*/,++.,.,)33.*

.33)+1+))):,1.*.33)+17

89 ,.,/3.+5.33)+1.3),,

89,:+)))1?))/1.,),31)/:+)7



!"#

! '()1,+*+,,++/3*+1,,/
,)):+5)+1*,++

3+/1,,+3).,/3)+1,,,.)1,/+)!

0! $
%&%'($)'*+","-!.!!"/%0/%!,$
	
 
"	

	






	




 -!"01

!"*2%

32'

.!$24*'*5''2'


 
	#


 6+($27'1''1

Case 15-50871-SCS Doc 21 Filed 11/18/15 Entered 11/18/15 11:01:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
/%!

!"#

)).,+.,*.,,+:+'.*,*,*34+,+1+)

)),+.,!

))*.,3+4,/'.*,*/*,*,+1+)34+))

*.,,:++#,/*3+!&.3*.,))1+),+,,*3,!

&.;./*/,*,+1+)34+))/+3))/4++

'.(**+3*/:+.+5331+,/+/*3,!'+4++*+
,)).4+4

/.;.,,.+@.+,+3+*31*+4++*+
,!

'))))*3;.+3.1*+3+)1,+*+3+*)5+)

)/+A3*B"###!##+4).:+.*+,+5'.+3,31)

,+3).*1*,).3*+3**,+5'.#,/;.+5!

C+3)!

&,+5'.

$%#++3)&.+=#0

?D00#

	,3?EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

F3).,))1.,/,:++)/!

-.,5 ,EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>'
	
<'

	>'
&
4+'G&

	

	

%#H H

'!#

 	H
' 	H&D0#0

>
	C HGC

0%0>	 


&<'	#D >	
D0="0

Nov 17 2015 /s/ Stephen C. St.John

Nov 18 2015

Case 15-50871-SCS Doc 21 Filed 11/18/15 Entered 11/18/15 11:01:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU NE 2 5 , 2015

NO. 03

- 14

- 00029

- CV

Oscar Melendez and Connie Melendez, Appellant s

v.

Citimortgage, Inc.; Ernestine Williams; and Wendy Alexander, Appellee s

APPEAL FROM THE 261ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE BOURLAND

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on October 17, 2014. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error

in the trial court’s judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s judgment

. The

appellant s shall pay a ll costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
§ 1300.52 Sanctions—risk assessment and non-compliance. ( a ) *Risk assessment.* ( 1 ) All States receiving funds under the grant programs authorized under 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 and Section 1906 shall be subject to an assessment of risk by NHTSA. In evaluating risks of a State highway safety program, NHTSA may consider, but is not limited to considering, the following for each State: ( i ) Financial stability;
( ii ) Quality of management systems and ability to meet management standards prescribed in this part and in 2 CFR part 200;
( iii ) History of performance. The applicant's record in managing funds received for grant programs under this part, including findings from Management Reviews;
( iv ) Reports and findings from audits performed under 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, or from the reports and findings of any other available audits; and
( v ) The State's ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, and other requirements imposed on non-Federal entities.
( 2 ) If a State is determined to pose risk, NHTSA may increase monitoring activities and may impose any of the specific conditions of 2 CFR 200.208, as appropriate.
( b ) *Non-compliance.* If at any time a State is found to be in non-compliance with the requirements of the grant programs under this part, the requirements of 2 CFR parts 200 and 1201, or with any other applicable law, the actions permitted under 2 CFR 200.208 and 200.339 may be applied as appropriate.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 96-10408

Conference Calendar

__________________

RONALD DEAN LOWE,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

WELDON CANTRELL ET AL.,

 Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 95-CV-1370-TG

- - - - - - - - - -

August 20, 1996

Before KING, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ronald Dean Lowe, Oklahoma inmate #219027, appeals the

dismissal as frivolous of his civil rights complaint concerning

the denial of medical care for a pretrial detainee and conspiracy

thereof. We have carefully reviewed the record and Lowe's

arguments. For essentially the same reasons upon which the

district court relied, see Lowe v. Cantrell, No. 3:95-CV-1370-T

(N.D. Tex. Mar. 28, 1996), we detect no abuse of discretion. See
No. 96-10408

-2-

Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992). Lowe's remaining

arguments, such as the impartiality of the magistrate judge and

the propriety of the dismissal without opportunity to amend and

before service or discovery, are without merit.

This appeal is frivolous and therefore is DISMISSED. See

5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Lowe that any additional frivolous

appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To

avoid sanctions, Lowe is further cautioned to review all pending

appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are

frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
### §1684. Annual reports

The Secretary shall make annual reports to the Congress on the programs authorized by this subchapter. These reports shall be submitted with the reports required under section 1606(c) of this title.

(Pub. L. 96–554, §5, Dec. 19, 1980, 94 Stat. 3258.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1981, see section 9 of Pub. L. 96–554, set out as a note under section 1681 of this title.
§ 51.24 Delivery of submissions. ( a ) *Delivery by U.S. Postal Service.* Submissions sent to the Attorney General by the U.S. Postal Service, including certified mail or express mail, shall be addressed to the Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights Division, United States Department of Justice, Room 7254-NWB, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20530.
( b ) *Delivery by other carriers.* Submissions sent to the Attorney General by carriers other than the U.S. Postal Service, including by hand delivery, should be addressed or may be delivered to the Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights Division, United States Department of Justice, Room 7254-NWB, 1800 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006.
( c ) *Electronic submissions.* Submissions may be delivered to the Attorney General through an electronic form available on the website of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division at *www.justice.gov/crt/voting/ .* Detailed instructions appear on the website. Jurisdictions should answer the questions appearing on the electronic form, and should attach documents as specified in the instructions accompanying the application.
( d ) *Telefacsimile submissions.* In urgent circumstances, submissions may be delivered to the Attorney General by telefacsimile to (202) 616-9514. Submissions should not be sent to any other telefacsimile number at the Department of Justice. Submissions that are voluminous should not be sent by telefacsimile.
( e ) *Email.* Submissions may not be delivered to the Attorney General by email in the first instance. However, after a submission is received by the Attorney General, a jurisdiction may supply additional information on that submission by email to *vot1973c@usdoj.gov .* The subject line of the email shall be identified with the Attorney General's file number for the submission (YYYY-NNNN), marked as “Additional Information,” and include the name of the jurisdiction.
( f ) *Special marking.* The first page of the submission, and the envelope (if any), shall be clearly marked: “Submission under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.”
( g ) The most current information on addresses for, and methods of making, section 5 submissions is available on the Voting Section website at *www.justice.gov/crt/voting/ .*
[Order No. 3262-2011, 76 FR 21245, Apr. 15, 2011]
Sanitized Purity Data on Second Process Material
#### § 549.73 Appealing the fee.

You may seek review of issues related to health service fees through the Bureau's Administrative Remedy Program (see 28 CFR part 542).
§ 523.31 Who is eligible for DCEGT? You are eligible for DCEGT if: ( a ) You are incarcerated in a Bureau of Prisons' (Bureau) institution or a Bureau contract facility;
( b ) You are serving a term of imprisonment for a D.C. criminal code violation committed before August 5, 2000;
( c ) Your Unit Team approved or designed a plan for you to complete a program designated by the Bureau as eligible for DCEGT;
( d ) The Supervisor of Education (SOE) finds that you successfully completed a Bureau-designated education program on or after August 5, 1997; and
( e ) You did not violate prison discipline rules while enrolled in the program (see § 523.33).
### §460aa–5. Cooperation with other agencies in development and operation of facilities and services; Stanley, restoration

The Secretary may cooperate with other Federal agencies, with State and local public agencies, and with private individuals and agencies in the development and operation of facilities and services in the area in furtherance of the purposes of this subchapter, including, but not limited to, the restoration and maintenance of the historic setting and background of the frontier ranch-type town of Stanley.

(Pub. L. 92–400, §6, Aug. 22, 1972, 86 Stat. 614.)
E315822- CS 05/01/2020

coronavirus/gov.cdc

اگر به کووید19- مبتال شده‌اید یا مشکوک به ابتال هستید:

بینی خودرا بپوشانید. .6 به هنگام رسفهیاعطسهدهان و

.2 بادقت

عالئم خود را کنرتل کنید. اگر

عالئم بیامری شام بدتر شد، فورا

با ارائه دهنده خدمات مراقبت

بهداشتی خود متاس بگیرید. 

.4 اگر وقت معاینه دارید، از قبل با

ارائهدهنده خدمات مراقبت

بهداشتی متاسبگیریدو اطالع

دهید که به کووید19- مبتال شدهاید

یا مشکوک به ابتال هستید.

.7 به طورمرتبو حداقل به مدت 20 ثانیه

دستان خود را با آب و صابون بشوییدو

یا از ضد عفونی کننده دست حاوی حداقل

%60 الکل استفاده کنید. 

از سایر افراد حارض در خانهفاصله بگیرید. .8 تا جای ممکن، در یک اتاق مخصوص مبانیدو

همچنین، در صورت امکان، از دستشویی و

حامم مجزا استفاده کنید. اگرالزم است در

داخل یا خارج از خانه در اطراف افراد دیگری

حضور داشته باشید، از یک ماسک صورت

استفاده کنید.

.1 در خانهمبانیدو به مدرسه یا محل کار

نروید. و از رفنت به سایر مکانهای عمومی

خودداری کنید. اگرالزم است که بیرون

بروید، از استفاده هرگونه حمل و نقل

عمومی، به اشرتاک گذاری خودرو و یا

استفاده از تاکسی خودداری کنید.

.9 از بهاشرتاک گذاری لوازم شخصی با

دیگر افراد خانواده مانند بشقاب، حوله و

وسایل تخت خواب خودداری کنید.

بنوشید. .3 اسرتاحتکنیدوآب کافی

1010متام سطوحی کهبه طور مرتب ملس

میشوند مانند پیشخوانها، روی میزها، و

دستگیرههای در را متیز کنید. از دستامل

نظافت و اسپری متیزکننده خانگی طبق

دستورالعمل موجود روی برچسب آنها

استفاده کنید. 

.5 در موارد اورژانسی، با 911

متاس بگیرید و بهافراداعزامی

اورژانس اطالع دهیدکه شام مبتال

به کووید19- و یا مشکوک به ابتال

هستید.

10 کاری کهمی‌توانیدبرای مدیریت

عالئم ابتال بهکووید19- خود در خانهانجامدهید
§ 523.16 Lump sum awards. Any staff member may recommend to the Warden the approval of an inmate for a lump sum award of extra good time. Such recommendations must be for an exceptional act or service that is not part of a regularly assigned duty. The Warden may make lump sum awards of extra good time not to exceed thirty days. If the recommendation is for an award in excess of thirty days and the Warden concurs, the Warden shall refer the recommendation to the Regional Director who may approve the award. No award may be approved which would exceed the maximum number of days allowed under 18 U.S.C. 4162. The actual length of time served on the sentence, to the date that the exceptional act or service terminated, is the basis on which the maximum amount possible to award is calculated. No seniority is accrued for such awards. Staff may recommend lump sum awards of extra good time for the following reasons: ( a ) An act of heroism;
( b ) Voluntary acceptance and satisfactory performance of an unusually hazardous assignment;
( c ) An act which protects the lives of staff or inmates or the property of the United States; this is to be an act and not merely the providing of information in custodial or security matters;
( d ) A suggestion which results in substantial improvement of a program or operation, or which results in significant savings; or
( e ) Any other exceptional or outstanding service.