alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite ofcataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications.  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the eventthat publications are no longer available from the original publishing agencysite. (Historical purposes)
**Title:****Tears [electronicresource].**
 
SuDoc:Y 3.C 83/2:2 T 22
ItemNumber: 1089-Q-02 (online)
CGPsystem Number: 000578396- tears_poster_100.jpgtears_poster_300.jpgtears_poster_8x11.jpg
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-06-1996
<CASH>                                          59,358
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,907
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                99,941
<PP&E>                                         358,567
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,422,770
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           50,092
<BONDS>                                          1,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           640
<OTHER-SE>                                     911,689
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,422,770
<SALES>                                         55,402
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               186,218
<CGS>                                           20,515
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   20,515
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,138
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 82,876
<INCOME-TAX>                                    30,992
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    48,865
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 4300.21 What must I include in my application? ( a ) You must include a certification of reindeer allotment to you, signed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, if you are to receive a herd from the Government. If you obtain reindeer from a source other than the Government, you should state the source and show evidence of purchase or option to purchase.
( b ) Your initial application must list the location of and describe the improvements you own in the application area. You must have this statement verified by the Bureau of Indian Affairs before you submit it to BLM.
#### American Castype Corporation v. Niles-Bement-Pond Company.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Callahan, JJ.
NO. 07-03-0143-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL A

	DECEMBER 12, 2003

	______________________________

	ISRIEL MCBRIDE, JR., APPELLANT

	V.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

	________________________________

	FROM THE 237TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

	NO. 95-421290; HONORABLE JOHN R. MCFALL, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before JOHNSON, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

	MEMORANDUM OPINION

	Appellant Isriel McBride, Jr., appeals a conviction for attempted murder.  We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

BACKGROUND

	Pursuant to his conviction and assessment of punishment by a jury, on February 7, 1996, sentence of confinement for life in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, was imposed on appellant in cause number 95-421290 in the 237th District Court of Lubbock County.  On March 20, 2003, appellant, acting pro se, filed a document entitled “RE: APPEAL NUMBER” with the clerk of this court, referencing his conviction.  We interpret the document as a notice of appeal from his conviction.    

LAW

	In a criminal case, appeal is perfected by timely filing a notice of appeal.  Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a).  The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the day sentence is imposed or after the day the trial court enters an appealable order, unless a timely motion for new trial is filed. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a).   If a timely Motion for New Trial is filed, then the notice of appeal must be filed within 90 days after sentence is imposed.  Id.

	An untimely-filed notice of appeal will not invoke the jurisdiction of the court of appeals.  See State v. Riewe, 13 S.W.3d 408, 411 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000).  Thus, if an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal, and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal.  Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 523-25 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996).

	ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION

	Appellant’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.  This court does not have jurisdiction over the appeal.  Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210; Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 523. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  Tex. R. App. P. 39.8, 40.2, 43.2. 

								Phil Johnson

								Chief Justice

Do not publish.
#### Stephen Comesky and James E. Morier, Copartners, Doing Business under the Firm Name and Style of Comesky & Morier, Respondents, v. J. Frank Fellows, Appellant.

Motion denied.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 13240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5438]

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

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

National Endowment for the Arts; National Council on the Arts 
172nd Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Pub. L. 92-463), as amended, notice is hereby given that a meeting of 
the National Council on the Arts will be held on March 24-25 2011 in 
Rooms 716 and M-09 at the Nancy Hanks Center, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20506.
    This meeting, from 5 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 24th in 
Room 716 and from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. on Friday, March 25th in Room M-09 
(ending times are approximate), will be open to the public on a space 
available basis. The Thursday agenda will include review and voting on 
applications and guidelines. On Friday, the meeting will begin with 
opening remarks by the Chairman, followed by presentations on Arts 
Education: Engaging New Audiences and Interagency Partnerships. The 
meeting will adjourn following concluding remarks and announcement of 
voting results.
    A portion of this meeting, from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. on Friday, March 
25th, will be webcast. The webcast can be accessed by going to Art 
Works blog at http://www.arts.gov/artworks.
    If, in the course of the open session discussion, it becomes 
necessary for the Council to discuss non-public commercial or financial 
information of intrinsic value, the Council will go into closed session 
pursuant to subsection (c)(4) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 
U.S.C. 552b, and in accordance with the determination of the Chairman 
of November 10, 2009. Additionally, discussion concerning purely 
personal information about individuals, submitted with grant 
applications, such as personal biographical and salary data or medical 
information, may be conducted by the Council in closed session in 
accordance with subsection (c)(6) of 5 U.S.C. 552b.
    Any interested persons may attend, as observers, Council 
discussions and reviews that are open to the public. If you need 
special accommodations due to a disability, please contact the Office 
of AccessAbility, National Endowment for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506, 202/682-5532, TTY-TDD 202/682-5429, 
at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting.
    Further information with reference to this meeting can be obtained 
from the Office of Communications, National Endowment for the Arts, 
Washington, DC 20506, at 202/682-5570.

    Dated: March 4, 2011.
Kathy Plowitz-Worden,
Panel Coordinator, Office of Guidelines and Panel Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-5438 Filed 3-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537-01-P
```
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 13-40226 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. EDUVAR ROJAS-MURGA, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:12-CR-896-1

Before DAVIS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Eduvar Rojas-Murga has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders

v. C alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United S tates v . F lores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2 011). Rojas-Murga has filed a response and has m oved for substitution of counsel or leave to proceed pro se. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Rojas-Murga’s claim of ineffective a ssistance of counsel; such a clai m g e n e r ally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Decem ber 17, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 13-40226 Document: 00512473864 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2013No. 13-40226

claim has not been raised before the district court since n o opportunity existed to develop the record o n t h e m e r i t s of t he allegations.” United S tates v. Cantwell , 470 F .3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (int e r n a l q uotation marks and citation omitted). We have r eviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Rojas-Murga’s response. W e concur with counsel’s assessment that t h e a p p e a l p r e s e n t s n o nonfrivolous issue for a ppellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS D ISMISSED. See 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2. Rojas-Murga’s motion for substitution o f counsel or leave to proceed pro se is DENIED.

2 Case: 13-40226 Document: 00512473864 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2013
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsA Practical Engineering Approach to Predicting Fatigue Crack Growth in Riveted Lap JointsAn extensive experimental database has been assembled from very detailed teardown examinations of fatigue cracks found in rivet holes of fuselage structural components. Based on this experimental database, a comprehensive analysis methodology was developed to predict the onset of widespread fatigue damage in lap joints of fuselage structure. Several computer codes were developed with specialized capabilities to conduct the various analyses that make up the comprehensive methodology. Over the past several years, the authors have interrogated various aspects of the analysis methods to determine the degree of computational rigor required to produce numerical predictions with acceptable engineering accuracy. This study led to the formulation of a practical engineering approach to predicting fatigue crack growth in riveted lap joints. This paper describes the practical engineering approach and compares predictions with the results from several experimental studies.Document ID20000038233Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsHarris, C. E.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA United States)*Piascik, R. S.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA United States)*Newman, J. C., Jr.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateMay 1, 2000Subject CategoryMetals And Metallic MaterialsReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2000-210106L-17956NAS 1.15:210106Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 706-11-11-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20000038233.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
* Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of

opinions that merely decide particular cases on the basis of

well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the

public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that

Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-20179 

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES ONYEJEKWE,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-93-307-1

- - - - - - - - - -

December 20, 1995

Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Charles Onyejekwe appeals his sentence, arguing that the

district court erred in finding that two prior state-court

convictions were "unrelated cases" under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(2). 

We have conducted a de novo review of this issue and conclude

that the district court did not commit reversible error by

treating each prior conviction as a separate case under the

Guidelines.

AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. City Bank Farmers Trust Company, as Trustee under the Will of Julia E. Cameron, Deceased, Appellant, against William W. Mills et al., Constituting the Tax Commission of the City of New York, Respondent. [632 10th Ave., Borough of Manhattan.]

No opinion. Settle order on notice. Present — Peck, P-. J., Dore, Cohn, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4948 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4948

 To allow States to authorize State and local law enforcement officers 
   to enforce the provisions of Federal immigration law relating to 
                 unlawful entry into the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 27, 2022

  Mr. Hawley introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To allow States to authorize State and local law enforcement officers 
   to enforce the provisions of Federal immigration law relating to 
                 unlawful entry into the United States.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Empowering States to Deport Illegal 
Immigrants Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO 
              ENFORCE CERTAIN FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS.

    (a) In General.--States may authorize State and local law 
enforcement officers to enforce provisions of Federal immigration law 
that prohibit the unlawful entry into the United States, including 
sections 271 through 280 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1321 through 1330).
    (b) Effect of Authorization on Supreme Court Ruling.--Subsection 
(a) effectively abrogates the 2012 decision of the Supreme Court in 
Arizona v. United States (567 U.S. 387).
    (c) Prosecution Authority.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
law, State prosecutors are authorized to initiate prosecutions for 
violations of Federal immigration law referred to in subsection (a) in 
a United States District Court that has jurisdiction over--
            (1) the place at which any such violation occurred; or
            (2) the place at which the person charged for any such 
        violation is apprehended.
    (d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 279 of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1329) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``, or by a State prosecutor pursuant to 
        section 2(c) of the Empowering States to Deport Illegal 
        Immigrants Act,'' before ``that arise''; and
            (2) by inserting ``It shall be the duty of the State 
        prosecutor of the appropriate State to prosecute every such 
        suit when brought by a State.'' after ``United States.''
                                 <all>
```
¿Por qué debo dejar de fumar ahora? ¿Por qué debo dejar de fumar ahora?

Fumar puede retardar su recuperación de cirugías y

enfermedades. También puede retardar la 

cicatrización de los huesos y heridas. 

En todos los hospitales de los Estados Unidos está prohibido fumar. Se le dirá que NO fume durante 

su estadía en el hospital – ¡ahora es una excelente

ocasión para dejar de fumar!

¿Cómo dejo de fumar en el hospital? ¿Cómo dejo de fumar en el hospital?

Consejos útiles para mantenerse sin fumar Consejos útiles para mantenerse sin fumar

Converse con su doctor o con otro empleado del

hospital respecto a un plan para dejar de fumar.

Pida ayuda ahora mismo.

Su doctor puede darle medicamentos para 

ayudarle a manejar la abstinencia mientras esté en 

el hospital y después de su estadía.

Pídales apoyo a sus amistades y familiares.

Continúe con su plan de dejar de fumar después de su estancia

en el hospital.

Asegúrese de que salga del hospital con las medicinas o recetas

médicas correctas. 

Si “se descuida” y fuma, no se dé por vencido. Fije una 

nueva fecha para regresar al buen camino.

Para solicitar ayuda respecto a dejar de fumar, llame 

gratuitamente a la Línea de Dejar de Fumar del National

Cancer Institute: 1-877-44U-QUIT. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Public Health Service

July 2003

Dejar de Fumar le Ayuda Dejar de Fumar le Ayuda 

a Sanar Más Rápido a Sanar Más Rápido

Su visita al hospital es una excelente ocasión 

para dejar de fumar.
#### § 404.57 Does this rule have any affect on state water law?

No. Neither the Act nor this rule preempts or affects state water law or any interstate compact governing water. Reclamation will comply with state water laws in carrying out this rule.
#### In the Matter of Morris H. Siegel, Petitioner, against Harold J. Crawford, as a Justice of the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Respondent, and Mae Harding, Intervener, Respondent.

*879Hagarty, Carswell, Adel, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District

1

Judge for the District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-3810

___________

Philip R. Anderson; *

Ki Ok Bae Anderson, *

*

Appellants, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Chase Manhattan Mortgage * [UNPUBLISHED]

Corporation, *

*

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: February 20, 1997

 Filed: March 6, 1997

___________

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Philip R. and Ki Ok Bae Anderson appeal from the district

court's dismissal of their action against Chase Manhattan Mortgage 1

Corporation (Chase) for failure to prosecute. We affirm.

We conclude that the district court did not abuse its

discretion in dismissing the Andersons' appeal. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 41(b); Sterling v. United States, 985 F.2d 411, 412 (8th Cir.

1993) (per curiam) (standard of review). Although the Andersons

were notified that they were required to file their brief within
-2-

fifteen days after their appeal was docketed, see Fed. Bankr. R.

8009(a)(1), they had filed nothing when the district court
-3-

dismissed the appeal after three months, and they have offered no

explanation for their failure to do so. See Nielsen v. Price, 17

F.3d 1276, 1277 (10th Cir. 1994) (district court did not abuse its

discretion in dismissing bankruptcy appeal with prejudice where pro

se party failed to file brief, noting party's unexplained failure

to timely file brief); see also Schooley v. Kennedy, 712 F.2d 372,

373 (8th Cir. 1983) (per curiam) (pro se litigants are not excused

from compliance with procedural and local rules, including rules

requiring brief to be filed).

Chase has moved to strike the Andersons’ brief and for an

award of double costs on the basis of derogatory remarks in the

brief directed at the bankruptcy court judge, the district court

judge, and counsel for Chase. These remarks include anti-Semitic

references and unsupported accusations of collusion, bribery, and

impropriety. We find the Andersons' accusations to be improvident,

insolent and scandalous, and we therefore award Chase double costs

and order that the derogatory remarks be stricken. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1912; Fed. R. App. P. 38; and Mullen v. Galati, 843 F.2d 293,

294-95 (8th Cir. 1988) (per curiam). Chase is directed to file

with the clerk a verified bill of costs in accordance with Fed. R.

App. P. 39(d).

We deny all remaining motions.

The judgment is affirmed.

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:
-4-

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL

- TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 15a0692n.06

Case No. 15

- 4151

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

FIRE FIGHTER SALES AND SERVICE CO. , d/b/a All Lines Technology

Plaintiff

- Appellant
,

v.

TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA ,

Defendant

- Appellee

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

BEFORE: DAUGHTERY, GIBBONS, and COOK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. Fire Fighter Sa les and Service Co. appeals the district court ’s decision

grant ing Travelers Casualty and Surety’s motion for summary judgment. Having reviewed the
record, the applicable law, and the parties’ briefs, we are not persuaded that the district court

erred . Because the district court fully articulated the reasons why judgment sho uld be entered for

Travelers , the issuance of a detailed opinion by this court would be duplicative and would serve
no useful purpose. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court upon the
reasoning set out by that court in its order and opinion entered on September 30, 2015.