alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 16, 2018

No. 04-18-00191-CV

Noe GARCIA, Rosa Garcia, Maria G. Ruel, Unknown Heirs of Conrado Ruben Garcia, Gloria 

G. Valdez, Eddie Garcia, Saul Flores, Stella Shull, Joel Flores, Hector Flores, and Oscar Flores, 

et al.,

Appellants

v.

Anna Maria SALAZAR and Carlos Abel Salazar,

Appellees

From the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13-09-00220-CVL

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The court reporter identified in appellants’ docketing statement as the reporter 

responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this appeal has filed a notification of late record 

stating he did not make a record of any hearing on any of the dates provided by appellants. It is 

therefore ORDERED that the appellate record is complete, and appellants’ brief must be filed no 

later than thirty days from the date of this order.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 16th day of April, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
#### § 4.420 Applicability of general rules.

To the extent they are not inconsistent with these special rules, the general rules of the Office of Hearings and Appeals in subpart B of this part are also applicable to hearings, procedures.
^ ''i j i s o 

## 3

= n Februar y8 , 201 2
T o Who m i tMa yConcern : I a m writin g thi s lette ri n respons e t o th e Su n Countr yslo texemptio n Docke tNo . FAA-2012-0089 . I wis h t o expres s m yopinio n tha tSu n Countr y Airline s continu e t o b e allowe d t o hav e thei rspac e a tReaga n Airpor ti n Washington , DC s o th e non-sto p flight s fro m Lansin g t o DC ca n continue . Thi s i s a rout e tha ti s frequentl yuse d b yman ypeopl e I kno wan d i s affordabl e an d dependabl e fo rtraveler s wh o nee d t o fl yfro m th e Lansing , Michiga n are a t o Washington , DC . I woul d lik e t o se e Su n Countr yb e abl e t o continu e t o offe rthi s flight . Sincerely , Elle n Gleitsman n 

# D 596 7 Eagle s Wa y Haslett , Michiga n 4884 0
### §1357. Items not subject to regular tax; depreciation; interest

#### (a) Exclusion from gross income

Gross income of an electing corporation shall not include its income from qualifying shipping activities.

#### (b) Electing group member

Gross income of a corporation (other than an electing corporation) which is a member of an electing group shall not include its income from qualifying shipping activities conducted by such member.

#### (c) Denial of losses, deductions, and credits

#### (1) General rule

Subject to paragraph (2), each item of loss, deduction (other than for interest expense), or credit of any taxpayer with respect to any activity the income from which is excluded from gross income under this section shall be disallowed.

#### (2) Depreciation

#### (A) In general

Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the adjusted basis (for purposes of determining gain) of any qualifying vessel shall be determined as if the deduction for depreciation had been allowed.

#### (B) Method

#### (i) In general

Except as provided in clause (ii), the straight-line method of depreciation shall apply to qualifying vessels the income from operation of which is excluded from gross income under this section.

#### (ii) Exception

Clause (i) shall not apply to any qualifying vessel which is subject to a charter entered into before the date of the enactment of this subchapter.

#### (3) Interest

#### (A) In general

Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the interest expense of an electing corporation shall be disallowed in the ratio that the fair market value of such corporation's qualifying vessels bears to the fair market value of such corporation's total assets.

#### (B) Electing group

In the case of a corporation which is a member of an electing group, the interest expense of such corporation shall be disallowed in the ratio that the fair market value of such corporation's qualifying vessels bears to the fair market value of the electing groups total assets.

(Added Pub. L. 108–357, title II, §248(a), Oct. 22, 2004, 118 Stat. 1455.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The date of the enactment of this subchapter, referred to in subsec. (c)(2)(B)(ii), is the date of enactment of Pub. L. 108–357, which was approved Oct. 22, 2004.

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

#### Effective Date

Section applicable to taxable years beginning after Oct. 22, 2004, see section 248(c) of Pub. L. 108–357, set out as an Effective Date of 2004 Amendments note under section 56 of this title.
### §5128. Application of laws and treaties

All laws, general and special, and all treaty provisions affecting any Indian reservation which has voted or may vote to exclude itself from the application of the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984) [25 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.], shall be deemed to have been continuously effective as to such reservation, notwithstanding the passage of said Act of June 18, 1934. Nothing in the Act of June 18, 1934, shall be construed to abrogate or impair any rights guaranteed under any existing treaty with any Indian tribe, where such tribe voted not to exclude itself from the application of said Act.

(June 15, 1935, ch. 260, §4, 49 Stat. 378.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Act of June 18, 1934, referred to in text, is act June 18, 1934, ch. 576, 48 Stat. 984, popularly known as the Indian Reorganization Act, which is classified generally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 5101 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 478b of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
COMMENT SHEET 

PUBLIC WORKSHOP FOR THE DELTA MENDOTA/CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT 

INTERTIE PROJECT 

Name: Jerry Toenyes 

Organization and Address: Northern California Power Agency, 651 Commerce 

Drive, Roseville, Ca 95678 

Phone: (916) 781-4297 

E-mail: Jerrv.Toenyes@ncpa.com 

The Bureau of Reclamation hosted a public workshop on February 11, 2014 to 

discuss the draft cost allocation and repayment options for the Delta-Mendota 

Canal/California Aqueduct Intertie (Intertie). A Repayment Analysis report was 

made available for the meeting presenting three options for the allocation and 

repayment of Intertie costs and Reclamation invited comments on the report. 

Section 3 of the Intertie Cost Allocation Information Report published in 

December 2013 clearly shows that CalSim II modeling studies identify 

agricultural water service contractors as the sole beneficiary of the project. 

Reclamation Policy PEC 01-02, referenced in the Repayment Analysis report, states 

the purpose of a cost allocation is to relate the costs to the benefits derived from the 

project. The policy further states that a systematic and impartial allocation is 

required to determine and assign project costs that are clearly identifiable with the 

particular purposes they serve. Since agricultural water service contractors are the 

only beneficiaries of the Intertie, they must be solely responsible for repayment of 

project costs as defined in Reclamation's Policy PEC 01-02. Thus, options 1 and 3 

do not comply with Reclamation policy. 

In addition Reclamation is currently undertaking a cost reallocation for the entire 

CVP using the Separable Cost - Remaining Benefit (SCRB) cost allocation 

procedure. As delineated by Reclamation on numerous occasions during the 

current CVP cost allocation process, the first step in allocating costs is to determine 

the specific or separable costs that serve only one function. Since the Intertie serves 

only one project purpose, options 1 and 3 do not comply with the SCRB allocation 

procedure being used for the CVP cost reallocation. Costs need to be allocated to 

the beneficiaries of the project to comply with the SCRB procedures. 

The Fiscal Effects section of the Repayment Analysis for options 1 and 3 reveals 

costs would be allocated to commercial power customers even though they do not 

receive any benefit from the project. Reclamation must follow its cost allocation 

policies and allocate costs to the identified beneficiaries. Thus, options 1 and 3 

cannot be considered in the final allocation of Intertie costs.
Skip to Content

        -   Log in            -  Log inEmailPassword Show Password	            Remember meAlready have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -            -  Forgot your password?Email Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -            -  Resend confirmation instructionsEmail Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -   Sign Up            -  Sign upEmail Password Passwords must be at least 6 characters and contain at least one lower-case letter, one upper-case letter, one number, and one punctuation mark or symbolPassword confirmation  Show Password            Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 

# Search Publications

- Home

#           National Daily Cattle Beef Summary Report             AMSLog in or Sign Up to subscribe        

Division:Livestock, Poultry and Seed Program

----

Frequency of Release:Daily

----

Category:Animals and Animal Products:Livestock

Keywords:beefbeef industrymarket analysispricesproductionslaughter

----

## Releases

            -  « Previous 
            -  Next » 
            -  1 
            -  2 
            -  3 
            -  4 
            -  5 
            -  ... 
            -  145 
            -  146 

| Sep 27, 2024 | PDF | Sep 27, 2024: National Daily Cattle Beef Summary Report  detailsx                Sep 27, 2024: National Daily Cattle Beef Summary Report Release datetime:Sep 27, 2024Close |
|--------------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Contact office name:Livestock, Poultry, and Grain Market News

Contact email:Websupport.lpgmn@ams.usda.gov

##         Agency Announcements        
Do you also want to subscribe to all agency announcements from ?
NoYesFooter content with page navigation, site information, and copyright.-  Home 
-  Release Calendar 
×Release CalendarClose
-  About
-  Help 
-  Contact 
-  API 

The USDA Economics, Statistics and Market Information System (ESMIS) contains over 2,100 publications from five agencies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). These materials cover U.S. and international agriculture and related      topics. Mann Library at Cornell University developed and maintains this site.

© 2024 USDA Economics, Statistics and Market Information System
USDA ESMIS partners list with links to their websites.Partners:- Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)
- Economic Research Service (ERS)
- Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS)
- National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
- World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB)
- 
- Albert R. Mann Library, Cornell University
- United States Department of Agriculture
Cornell development contact information.Developed & supported by:
**Albert R. Mann Library**Cornell UniversityIthaca, NY 14853-4301 Phone: (607) 255-3296 Email: usda-help@cornell.edu
#### § 4.1197 Appeals.

Any party desiring to appeal the decision of the administrative law judge shall have 5 days from receipt of the administrative law judge's decision within which to file a notice of appeal with the Board. The Board shall act immediately to issue an expedited briefing schedule. The decision of the Board shall be issued within 60 days of the date the hearing record is closed by the administrative law judge or, if no hearing is held, within 60 days of the date the answer is filed.

[43 FR 34386, Aug. 3, 1978. Redesignated at 67 FR 61510, Oct. 1, 2002]
### §2033. Property in which the decedent had an interest

The value of the gross estate shall include the value of all property to the extent of the interest therein of the decedent at the time of his death.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 381; Pub. L. 87–834, §18(a)(2)(A), Oct. 16, 1962, 76 Stat. 1052.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1962—Pub. L. 87–834 struck out provisions which excepted real property situated outside of the United States.

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

#### Effective Date of 1962 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 87–834 applicable to estates of decedents dying after Oct. 16, 1962, except as otherwise provided, see section 18(b) of Pub. L. 87–834, set out as a note under section 2031 of this title.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsApproximations of thermoelastic and viscoelastic control systemsWell-posed models and computational algorithms are developed and analyzed for control of a class of partial differential equations that describe the motions of thermo-viscoelastic structures. An abstract (state space) framework and a general well-posedness result are presented that can be applied to a large class of thermo-elastic and thermo-viscoelastic models. This state space framework is used in the development of a computational scheme to be used in the solution of a linear quadratic regulator (LQR) control problem. A detailed convergence proof is provided for the viscoelastic model and several numerical results are presented to illustrate the theory and to analyze problems for which the theory is incomplete.Document ID19900015518Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsBurns, J. A.*(Virginia Polytechnic Inst. Blacksburg., United States)*Liu, Z. Y.*(Minnesota Univ. Duluth., United States)*Miller, R. E.*(University of Southern California Los Angeles., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1990Subject CategoryNumerical AnalysisReport/Patent NumberICASE-90-43AD-A225292NAS 1.26:182054NASA-CR-182054Accession Number90N24834Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: AF-AFOSR-0091-90CONTRACT_GRANT: AF-AFOSR-0001-89CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS1-18605CONTRACT_GRANT: F49620-87-C-0116CONTRACT_GRANT: N00014-88-K-0721Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900015518.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Table 38
                                          U.S. Department of Interior - Bureau of Reclamation
                                                 Central Valley Operations Office
 
                                            SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
                                                 STREAMFLOW DATA
 
Mean Monthly Flow in cfs                                  1997
 
                                Jan    Feb    Mar    Apr    May    Jun    Jul    Aug    Sep    Oct    Nov     Dec
 
SACRAMENTO RIVER
 
Shasta Computed Inflow       33184  12816   8167   7681   5699   4637   3936   3944   4125   4340   7320    7010
At Keswick                   41480  12540   5300   6420   9520  13240  14750  11110   8040   4650   4510    4210
At Bend Bridge               58300  17000   9520   7990  10120  14010  15490  15350  10820   6370   7610    7640
At Ord Ferry                 69380  23990   9220   7050   8090  11410  12870   9700   7990   4530   8050   12580
At Colusa                    40480  23220  10540   8030   7710   9770  10870   8890   7990   4880   6720   11440
Below Wilkins Slough         28110  20280  10510   6780   5990   8780   9610   8100   7430   4450   6380   11530
At Verona                    69790  49950  19910  10740   9310  13400  19830  17950  12890   9950  12680   19280
Sacramento at "I" Street     85460  56430  24120  13320  11400  15510  21570  19530  14320  12570  14760   21810
 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATIONS
 
Folsom Computed Inflow       31482   7877   5378   4198   3856   2831   1831   2008   2086   1537   1494    2176
American River at Nimbus Dam 32620   7230   4180   2630   2500   2670   2290   2000   1600   2415   2400    2400
Kings River at Pine Flat      4216   5884   4216   3134   5515   5894   5917   4272   1778    371    132     112
 
 
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
 
At Friant Dam                 8860   6360   1300    230    280    290    300    340    310    256    200     170
Near Vernalis                32950  32160  13410   4900   4550   2870   1870   1790   1940   2525   2130    2120
 
PUTAH CREEK
Berryessa Computed Inflow     5937    727    310    138     85     -4     27    -13    -27    -32    568     708
Putah Creek - Lake Solano     3881   1679    130     46     43     43     43     34     20     20     25      25
 
STANISLAUS RIVER
 
New Melones Computed Inflow   9775   3366   2515   2136   3276   1953   1010    895   1057    859    661     814
At Tulloch Dam                6384   6588   2946   2410   2837   2369   1943   1808   1147    928    457     340
At Orange Blossom             6997   6950   2111   1135   1568   1057    402    418    433    716    387     395
 
 
*  Data supplied by Central Valley Operations Coordinations Office
#### New York Life Insurance Company v. Glens Falls Insurance Company.

Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Callahan and Yan Yoorhis, JJ. [See 274 App. Div. 1045.]
§ 725.217 Determination of dependency; surviving divorced spouse. An individual who is the miner's surviving divorced spouse (see § 725.216) shall be determined to have been dependent on the miner if, for the month before the month in which the miner died: ( a ) The individual was receiving at least one-half of his or her support from the miner (see § 725.233(g)); or
( b ) The individual was receiving substantial contributions from the miner pursuant to a written agreement (see § 725.233(c) and (f)); or
( c ) A court order required the miner to furnish substantial contributions to the individual's support (see § 725.233(c) and (e)).
### §997. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 87–775, §7, Oct. 9, 1962, 76 Stat. 777, which provided for costs incident to making payments to be paid from the judgment fund, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsComments on the Rotational State and Non-Gravitational Forces of Comet 46/WIRTANENWe apply our experience of modeling the rotational state and non-gravitational forces of comet 1 P/Halley and other comets to comet 46P/Wirtanen. While the paucity of physical data on 46P/Wirtanen makes this process somewhat speculative, this comet's place as target for the important Rosetta mission gives significance to such a study. Our arguments are based on the summary of observational data provided by Jorda and Rickman (1995) and a comparative study of the behavior of other periodic comets. We find 46P/Wirtanen to have a level of surface activity relative to its mass that is dynamically more akin to that found in comet 1 P/Halley than in a typical periodic comet. We show through an illustrative numerical example that this apparent fact should likely lead to an excited spin state for this comet and that significant changes in the spin period could occur in a single pass through perihelion. We argue that the available observations are not sufficient to substantiate the claim of Jorda and Rickman (1995) that the nucleus is undergoing retrograde rotation and it is possible that the rotation is either prograde as well as retrograde. The substantial requirements that must be placed on any future observing program necessary to determine the precise rotational state are outlined. We advocate an extended (approx. two month) southern hemisphere observing campaign to determine the nuclear rotational state in 1996 if possible before activity turns on.Document ID19960047586Acquisition SourceHeadquartersDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsSamarasinha, Nalin H.*(National Optical Astronomy Observatories Tucson, AZ United States)*Mueller, Beatrice E. A.*(National Optical Astronomy Observatories Tucson, AZ United States)*Belton, Michael J. S.*(National Optical Astronomy Observatories Tucson, AZ United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1995Subject CategoryAstrophysicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:202189NASA-CR-202189NOAO-Preprint-688Accession Number96N33229Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NASA Order W-16492CONTRACT_GRANT: SNSF-8220-037209Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19960047586.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
9/15/2015 Request for Information ­ FAA­2015­2683

https://email.dot.gov/owa/9­AWA­AVS­333Exemptions@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAABFvqQJAFf5SI8crGhIsEIyBwD3qfMUO7BCQ74YBi9P12... 1/1

Request for Information ­ FAA­2015­2683

9­AWA­AVS­333Exemptions (FAA)

Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2015 4:01 PM

To: Fugatillc@gmail.com

Dear Mr. Fugate:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition

(Docket No. FAA−2015−2683). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which

is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to

proceed without this manual and remove closed‐set filming from your proposed operation

please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non‐proprietary) to your docket

at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or

electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any

further, we must receive the information described above by 9/29/15. If we do not receive the

information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

Regards,

Dan Ngo

FAA Office of Rulemaking

202­267­4264