alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Jessica L. Jarrett, Respondent, v Adam Mosslih, Appellant.

[825 NYS2d 246]

In a child support proceed ing pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of commitment of the Family Court, Queens County (Heffernan, J.), dated October 11, 2005, which committed him to the custody of the New York City Department of Corrections for consecutive weekends from October 14, 2005 through April 16, 2006, unless he purged himself of his contempt by paying the sum of $18,500 to the New York City Office of Child Support Enforcement.

*809Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of commitment as committed the father to the custody of the New York City Department of Corrections for consecutive weekends from October 14, 2005 through April 16, 2006 is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, as the period of incarceration has expired; and it is further,

Ordered that the order of commitment is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.

The father’s concession that he failed to pay support constituted prima facie evidence of his willful violation of an order of support of the same court (Borofsky, S.M.), dated January 14, 2005 (see Family Court Act § 454 [3] [a]; *Matter of Rawlins v*Williams, 27 AD3d 757 [2006]). The burden of going forward then shifted to the father to rebut the prima facie evidence by offering some competent, credible evidence of his inability to make the required payments *(see Matter of Powers v Powers,*86 NY2d 63, 68 [1995]). Since the father failed to rebut this evidence, the Family Court properly determined that the father willfully violated the support order.

The father’s contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is without merit *(see Matter of Giordano v Giordano,*259 AD2d 701, 702 [1999]). Florio, J.P., Adams, Krausman and Rivera, JJ., concur.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 10, 2024

No. 04-23-00506-CR

EX PARTE Adan Michel REYES-ALVARADO

From the County Court, Maverick County, Texas

Trial Court No. 31312

Honorable Susan D. Reed, Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS Adan Michel ReyesAlvarado’s appeal of the denial of his application for pretrial writ of habeas corpus for want of 

jurisdiction. We further consider Reyes-Alvarado’s appeal as a petition for writ of mandamus and 

DENY his request for mandamus relief WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

It is so ORDERED on July 10, 2024.

_____________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 10th day of July, 2024.

_____________________________

Luz Estrada, Chief Deputy Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 15330]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6572]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Amended Notice of 
Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Loan Repayment 
Program Review, which was published in the Federal Register on January 
11, 2011, FR 2011-583.
    This meeting was originally scheduled for February 1, 2011 but will 
take place on May 4, 2011. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: March 15, 2011.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-6572 Filed 3-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
**SBIRT in Arizona**

**Program Description**

In 2012 the SBIRT Grant Project began the implementation process in the five northern counties of the Arizona, (Navajo, Apache, Coconino, Mohave, and Yavapai).  These counties were targeted because they have the highest morbidity and mortality rates for substance use within Arizona.  The settings where the screenings were to be in Emergency Departments and Primary Care Clinics.

Presently the SBIRT Grant has been implemented in Navajo, Apache, Coconino and Yavapai counties in a partnership with North Country Health Care, Northern Arizona University and the Verde Valley Guidance Center.  Each site has a dedicated SBIRT staff person who oversees the SBIRT screening process and assists with data collection and entry, Brief Interventions, Brief Treatments, Referrals for Treatment and on-going training related to the SBIRT grant process.  

**Special/Unique Features**

The SBIRT Grant project is a partnership with the State of Arizona Governor’s Office for Children, Youth  and Families, the Arizona Department of Behavioral Health Services, and Northern Arizona Behavioral Health Authority (NARBHA) and all three partners join together to share resources and expertise to assure the success of the SBIRT Grant Project.

This project is unique in that northern Arizona is very diverse in terms of population.  There are 10 Native American Reservations, and a large number of summer residents who live in Coconino, Apache, Yavapai and Navajo counties who may seek medical services.  Additionally, Yavapai County has a large number of retirees who utilize medical services.  These varying populations require each site to be aware of cultural, socio-economic and other differences in order to accurately relate to and screen patients.

Another unique feature is the distances between sites and between the SBIRT Grant Project Coordinator’s office in Flagstaff, Arizona.  This means that there is a greater reliance on communicating via other forms of electronic devices.  To share an example, one dedicated staff person is split between two clinics—one in Holbrook and one in Show Low and to help assure that all patients who score for a Brief Intervention or Brief Treatment are captured, the North Country Health Care staff created an “iPad on wheels”.  If the staff member is in Holbrook and a patient in Show Low needs a Brief Intervention, she is contacted and the iPad is wheeled into the patient’s room.  A “face time” connection is made between the staff member and the patient which from all reports has worked very well.

All sites are incorporating some aspect of the screening process into their Electronic Health Records (EHR).  This process eliminates paper and the possibility of any Personal Health Information (PHI) being lost or compromised.  It is also a great example of the Integrated Care process.

**Tonya Hamilton**, SBIRT Project Director

Governor’s Office for Children, Youth and Families

1700 W. Washington, Suite 230

Phoenix, AZ 85007 

Office (602) 542-1760

Fax (602) 542-3423

Thamilton@az.gov
### §423h–1. Redesignation of park

The Petersburg National Military Park, established under authority of sections 423, 423a, and 423b to 423h of this title, and enlarged pursuant to sections 423a–1 and 423a–2 of this title, is redesignated the Petersburg National Battlefield.

(Pub. L. 87–603, §1, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 403.)
¿No te sientes bien? 

Quédate en casa si estás enfermo

Díselo a tu mamá, papá o cuidador antes de ir a la 

escuela. Díselo a tu maestro o a un adulto si te 

enfermas mientras estás en la escuela

CS 317450-A julio 30, 2020 1:34 p. m.

cdc.gov/coronavirus-es

Otros síntomas incluyen: 

fiebre, moqueo, diarrea, náuseas

o vómitos, cansancio, dolor de cabeza 

y poco apetito

tos

dolor de garganta pérdida del gusto 

o del olfato

dolor muscular

Dificultad o problema 

para respirar

escalofríos
Editorial Note on Part 645
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 645 appear at 65 FR 70311, Nov. 22, 2000.

§ 645.215 Approvals. ( a ) Each State transportation department shall submit a statement to the FHWA on the authority of utilities to use and occupy the right-of-way of State highways, the State transportation department's power to regulate such use, and the policies the State transportation department employs or proposes to employ for accommodating utilities within the right-of-way Federal-aid highways under its jurisdiction. Statements previously submitted and approved by the FHWA need not be resubmitted provided the statement adequately addresses the requirements of this part. When revisions are deemed necessary the changes to the previously approved statement may be submitted separately to the FHWA for approval. The State transportation department shall include similar information on the use and occupancy of such highways by private lines where permitted. The State shall identify those areas, if any, of Federal-aid highways within its borders where the State transportation department is without legal authority to regulate use by utilities. The statement shall address the nature of the formal agreements with local officials required by § 645.209(g) of this part. It is expected that the statements required by this part or necessary revisions to previously submitted and approved statements will be submitted to FHWA within 1 year of the effective date of this regulation.
( b ) Upon determination by the FHWA that a State transportation department's policies satisfy the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 109, 111, and 116, and 23 CFR 1.23 and 1.27, and meet the requirements of this regulation, the FHWA will approve their use on Federal-aid highway projects in that State
( c ) Any changes, additions or deletions the State transportation department proposes to the approved policies are subject to FHWA approval.
( d ) When a utility files a notice or makes an individual application or request to a STD to use or occupy the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway project, the STD is not required to submit the matter to the FHWA for prior concurrence, except when the proposed installation is not in accordance with this regulation or with the STD's utility accommodation policy approved by the FHWA for use on Federal-aid highway projects.
( e ) The State transportation department's practices under the policies or agreements approved under § 645.215(b) of this part shall be periodically reviewed by the FHWA.
(Information collection requirements in paragraph (a) were approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2125-0514) [50 FR 20354, May 15, 1985, as amended at 53 FR 2834, Feb. 2, 1988; 60 FR 34851, July 5, 1995; 65 FR 70312, Nov. 22, 2000]
From: "King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov>

To: Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Deirdre Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Nealson Watkins/RTP/USEPA/US@EP

Date: 01/26/2011 07:51 PM

Subject: Re: Answers to your cost questions on the CO NAAQS monitoring network

Thank you very much, Lydia, Deirdre and Nealson, this is very helpful (and Deirdre correctly predicted 

that I work on a mac at home, sometimes with filetype problems). 

This looks good to me, I have shared it with others, and will call you tomorrow (thu) to talk about final 

steps. 

Heidi
§ 636.513 Are limited negotiations allowed prior to contract execution? ( a ) Yes, after the source selection but prior to contract execution, you may conduct limited negotiations with the selected design-builder to clarify any remaining issues regarding scope, schedule, financing or any other information provided by that offeror. You must comply with the provisions of § 636.507 in the exchange of this information.
( b ) Limited negotiations conducted under this section may include negotiations necessary to incorporate the ideas and concepts from unsuccessful offerors into the contract if a stipend is offered by the contracting agency and accepted by the unsuccessful offeror and if the requirements of section 636.113 are met.
[67 FR 75926, Dec. 10, 2002, as amended at 73 FR 77502, Dec. 19, 2008]
SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

ciffliffiragn isf.1211101 

course of law. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d 

at 851. Moreover, this court has held that the right to appeal is generally 

an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief. Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 

P.3d at 841. 

Having considered the petition, we conclude that our 

intervention by way of extraordinary relief is not warranted. Smith, 107 

Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851; NRAP 21(b)(1). Accordingly, we 

ORDER the petition DENIED. 

, J. 

Hardesty 

&AAA 

Parraguirre 

cc: Hon. Doug Smith, District Judge 

Cohen-Johnson LLC 

Thorndal Armstrong Delk Balkenbush & Eisinger/Las Vegas 

Eighth District Court Clerk
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 8, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-41049

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ANDRES AYALA-SORROSO,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:04-CR-1728-ALL

--------------------

Before KING, GARWOOD, and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Andres AyalaSorroso raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8

U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate

criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance

is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Sintomas di Coronavirus (COVID-19)

cdc.gov/coronavirus

316475-Y 06/30/2020

Konxi sintomas di COVID-19, ki podi inklui kes sigintis:

*Buska kuidadu mediku imidiatamenti si algen sta ta 

mostra sinal di avizu di imerjénsia di COVID-19.

• Difikuldadi di respira

• Dor o preson na petu 

persistenti

• Novu dizorientason

• Inkapas di korda 

o di fika kordadu

• Bexu o rostu azuladu

Tosi Kalafrius Dor na musklu

Falta di ar o difikuldadi 

di respira*

Novu perda di 

gostu o txeru

Dor di garganta

Sintomas podi varia di un duensa leve a gravi, y es ta parsi di 2-14 

dias dipos di bu ser spostu a virus ki ta kauza COVID-19.

Kes lista ka é di tudu pusível sintomas. Pur favor txoma bu médiku pa kalker otus 

sintomas ki é gravi o preokupanti pa bo.

Fébri
### §460a–6. Blue Ridge Parkway extension; acceptance of lands; public use, administration, and maintenance areas; survey location of parkway extension crossing national forest land; transfer from Federal agency to administrative jurisdiction of Secretary of the Interior; national forest uses following transfer within national forest

The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to accept, on behalf of the United States, donations of land and interests in land in the States of North Carolina and Georgia, to construct thereon an extension of the Blue Ridge Parkway from the vicinity of Beech Gap, North Carolina, to the vicinity of Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park north of Atlanta and Marietta, Georgia, and to provide public use, administration, and maintenance areas in connection therewith. The lands accepted for the parkway extension may vary in width but shall average not more than one hundred and twenty-five acres per mile in fee simple plus not more than twenty-five acres per mile in scenic easements. The survey location and width of any portion of the parkway extension that crosses national forest land shall be jointly determined by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture. Where the parkway extension designated by the Secretary of the Interior traverses Federal lands, the head of the department or agency having jurisdiction over such lands is authorized to transfer to the Secretary of the Interior the part of the Federal lands mutually agreed upon as necessary for the construction, maintenance and administration of the parkway extension and public use thereof, without transfer of funds. Any such transfer within a national forest shall not preclude any national forest use that is compatible with parkway use and that is agreed upon by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture.

(Pub. L. 90–555, §1, Oct. 9, 1968, 82 Stat. 967.)
### §460–1. Inclusion of Ackia Battleground National Monument and Meriwether Lewis National Monument

To facilitate the administration of two areas of the national park system, known as Ackia Battleground National Monument, Mississippi, and Meriwether Lewis National Monument, Tennessee, those areas are included in the Natchez Trace Parkway, which they adjoin; and they shall be administered as a part of the parkway. In order to provide continued recognition of the significance of these portions of the parkway, the Secretary of the Interior shall provide them with appropriate designations in accordance with the historical events which occurred on them.

(Pub. L. 87–131, Aug. 10, 1961, 75 Stat. 335.)
§ 545.28 Achievement awards. ( a ) With prior approval of the Education Department, each inmate who completes the Literacy program, Vocational Training, or related trades classroom work that is part of a certified apprenticeship program may be granted an achievement award from performance pay funds.
( b ) With prior approval of the Psychology Services Department, each inmate who is making satisfactory progress or completes a residential drug treatment program may also be granted an achievement award from performance pay funds.
[61 FR 379, Jan. 4, 1996]
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 20, 2017

No. 0 4

- 16

- 00800

- CV

James F. MCKINNON, Appellant

v.

Robert Stone WALLIN and William Brandon Wallin,

Appellee

From the County Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10093 Honorable Polly Jackson Spencer, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

O n May 23, 2017, we abated this appeal and remanded the cause to the trial court so that it could, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(e) (3) , determine if the reporter’s

recor d was accurate. A supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s findings has now been filed. The trial court found that the “reporter’s record, as filed, accurately reflects and conforms to what occurred in the proceedings in the trial court on September 19, 2016.” We now REINSTATE this appeal on the docket of this Court.

At the time we abated this appeal, appellant had already filed an appellant’s brief and an amended appellant’s brief. On July 12, 2017, appellant filed what appears to be suppl ement to his amended appellant’s brief. (Although appellant titles this document a “reply” brief, no appellee’s brief has been filed as of yet.) This brief filed on July 12, 2017, does not conform to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38 because it does not (1) identify the parties and counsel; (2) include a table of contents; (3) include an index of authorities; and (4 ) include record references in the statement of facts. While substantial compliance with Rule 38 is sufficient, this court may order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly violates Rule 38. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.9(a). We conclude that the formal defects described above constitute flagrant

violations of Rule 38.

I f appellant wishes to supplement his amended brief fil ed on March 24, 2017, he must file, within fifteen days of the date of this order, a second amended appellant’s brief, which will replace his first amended brief filed on March 23, 2017. If appellant does not file such a secondamended appellant’s brief, w e will strike his “reply” brief filed on July 12, 2017. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 38.9(a); see also id. 42.3(c) (allowing dismissal of appellant’s case if appellant fails to comply with a requirement of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure or an order of this court).

If appellant files a second amended brief, appellees’ brief will be due thirty days after appellant’s second amended brief is filed. If appellant does not file a second amended brief, appellees’ brief will be due forty

- five days from the date of t his order.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 20th day of July, 2017

.

___________________________________ Luz Estrada Chief Deputy Clerk
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 205 (Monday, October 24, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65725-65726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27246]

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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.

[Public Notice 2011-076]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

ACTION: Submission for OMB review and comments request.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form Title: Used Equipment Questionnaire (EIB 11-03).

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a 
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to 
comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
    The collection will provide information needed to determine

[[Page 65726]]

compliance and creditworthiness for transaction requests submitted to 
Ex-Im Bank under its insurance, guarantee, and direct loan programs. 
Information presented in this form will be considered in the overall 
evaluation of the transaction, including Export-Import Bank's 
determination of the appropriate term for the transaction.
    The form can be view at: http://www.exim.gov/pub/pending/eib11-03.pdf.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before December 23, 2011 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSESES: Comments maybe submitted electronically on http://www.regulations.gov or by mail to Ms. Michele Kuester, Export-Import 
Bank of the United States, 811 Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20571

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Titles and Form Number: EIB 11-03 Used Equipment Questionnaire.
    OMB Number: 3048-xxxx.
    Type of Review: New.
    Need and Use: The information collected will provide information 
needed to determine compliance and creditworthiness for transaction 
requests submitted to the Export Import Bank under its insurance, 
guarantee, and direct loan programs.
    Affected Public: This form affects entities involved in the export 
of U.S. goods and services.
    Annual Number of Respondents: 1,000.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 minutes.
    Government Annual Burden Hours: 250 hours.
    Frequency of Reporting or Use: On Occasion.
    Total Cost to the Government: $9,680.00.

Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-27246 Filed 10-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
```
### §410aaa–53. Granite Mountains Natural Reserve

#### (a) Establishment

There is hereby designated the Granite Mountains Natural Reserve within the preserve comprising approximately nine thousand acres as generally depicted on a map entitled "Mojave National Park Boundary and Wilderness—Proposed 6", dated May 1991.

#### (b) Cooperative management agreement

On October 31, 1994, the Secretary shall enter into a cooperative management agreement with the University of California for the purposes of managing the lands within the Granite Mountains Natural Reserve. Such cooperative agreement shall ensure continuation of arid lands research and educational activities of the University of California, consistent with the provisions of this part and laws generally applicable to units of the National Park System.

(Pub. L. 103–433, title V, §513, Oct. 31, 1994, 108 Stat. 4494.)