alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Con ti nental H omes o f Texa s, L.P. ' From th e 37 th District Court

Ap pel lan t O f Bexar C ounty v . No. 07-0 7-00 283 -CV ' September 25, 2007 Theres a M or in; M ar k M or in and T ri s h a Ro b le s ; De l' sNu rs e ry & Lan dscap e, Lt d. f

/k/a Del's Nursery and Lan dscap ing, Inc. d/b /a Del's Lan dscap ing M ate rials ' Opi nio n by C hie f Just ic e Qui nn

Ap pel lee s JUDGMENT
Pursuantto the o pin ion of the C our t dated Sep tember

25, 2007, i t i s o rd ered, adj udg ed and decreed t hat t hisappeal i s d is mis sed. All cost s i n c u rre d in this Court having bee n pa id, no order perta ining to costs is made herein

. It is fu rther orde red, ad judged a nd d ecree d tha t inasm uc h a s t h e app eal is dis mis sed at ap pel lan t’ s req uest , no moti on for re hear ing w il l be ent ertai ned, and our mandate w il l is sue forthw it h. It isfurth er

ordered th at t hisdec is ion be certi fied bel ow for o bser

vance. o O o
________________________________________________________________________ 

TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 20-228 

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION 

Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and CROATIA 

Signed at Zagreb September 27, 2004 

Entered into force February 28, 2020 
 

 

NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)— 

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.”
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

WILLIAM P. WALTON, JR.,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

Nos. 4D2020-0655, 4D2022-2936 and 4D2022-2333

[December 28, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Martin County; Sherwood Bauer, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

432016CF000128A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Virginia Murphy, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael Kaiman,

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
§ 8c.10 Self-evaluation. ( a ) The agency shall, by July 26, 1989, evaluate its current policies and practices, and the effects thereof, that do not or may not meet the requirements of this part, and, to the extent modification of any such policies and practices is required, the agency shall proceed to make the necessary modifications.
( b ) The agency shall provide an opportunity to interested persons, including individuals with handicaps or organizations representing individuals with handicaps, to participate in the self-evaluation process by submitting comments (both oral and written).
( c ) The agency shall, until three years following the completion of the self-evaluation, maintain on file and make available for public inspection: ( 1 ) A description of areas examined and any problems identified, and
( 2 ) A description of any modifications made.
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

      In connection with the report of ProUroCare Medical Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael P.
Grossman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Richard Thon, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, that:

      (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.


/s/ Michael P. Grossman

Michael P. Grossman
Chief Executive Officer
August 2, 2004



/s/ Richard Thon

Richard Thon
Chief Financial Officer
August 2, 2004



                                       23
NO. 07-09-0164-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	  DECEMBER 15, 2009

	______________________________

	TIMOTHY MICHAEL KNOOP,

				Appellant

	v.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

				Appellee

								_________________________________

	FROM THE 31st DISTRICT COURT OF HEMPHILL COUNTY;

	NO. 2731; HON. STEVEN RAY EMMERT, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

	ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

	Appellant appeals from an order revoking his probation.  The clerk’s record was filed on June 24, 2009, and the reporter’s record on August 7, 2009.  Appellant’s counsel filed an Anders brief on September 28, 2009, and on October 7, 2009, this Court notified appellant by letter that he could file a response by November 6, 2009.  On October 26, 2009, appellant requested an extension of time to file his response to the Anders brief, which was granted to December 18, 2009.  

	On November 9, 2009, appellant informed this Court that he had requested the appellate record from his attorney but received no response.  We then directed appellant’s attorney to provide the record to appellant to aid in the preparation of a response.  Thereafter, counsel informed us by letter that he provided the record on September 25, 2009, but “we did not receive a copy of the Clerk’s Record from the Hemphill County District Clerk and advised Mr. Knoop accordingly.”  The district clerk’s office then sent us correspondence disclosing that appellant’s counsel had “not checked out our copy of the Clerk’s Record.”  An attorney cannot legitimately represent that no error exists without first reviewing the entire record.  Appellant’s counsel did not do that here.	

	Accordingly, we abate the appeal and remand the cause to the 31st District Court of Hemphill County, Texas.  Upon remand, the trial court shall remove appellant’s current attorney and appoint another to represent him in this appeal.  The trial court shall further order the newly appointed counsel to file an appellant’s brief, as per the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.  Should new counsel determine, after a thorough review of the appellate record, that the appeal is indeed frivolous, he may opt to file an Anders brief; however, he must comport with the requirements specified in In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) and In re J.B., __ S.W.3d ___, 2009 WL 283197 (Tex. App.–El Paso February 5, 2009, no pet. h.) before doing so.  

	The deadline for filing an appellant’s brief with the clerk of this appellate court is extended to February 1, 2010, unless further extended by this court.  Any responding brief which the State may care to submit shall be filed within 30 days thereafter.  Finally, the trial court is further directed to inform this court, in writing, of the name, address, and state bar number of appellant’s newly appointed counsel by January 4, 2010.  

	It is so ordered.

							Per Curiam

Do not publish.
§ 1110.101 Submission of certification; attestation. ( a ) In order to become certified under the certification program established under this part, a Person must submit a completed certification statement and any required documentation, using the most current version of the Limited Access Death Master File Subscriber Certification Form, and its accompanying instructions at *https://dmf.ntis.gov ,* together with the required fee.
( b ) In addition to the requirements under paragraph (a) of this section, in order to become certified, a Person must submit a written attestation from an Accredited Conformity Assessment Body that such Person has systems, facilities, and procedures in place as required under § 1110.102(a)(2). Such attestation must be based on the Accredited Conformity Assessment Body's review or assessment conducted no more than three years prior to the date of submission of the Person's completed certification statement, but such review or assessment need not have been conducted specifically or solely for the purpose of submission under this part.
[81 FR 34891, June 1, 2016]
### **CHAPTER 16B—CONTRACTS FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL RESEARCH**

Sec.
1900.
Interior Department programs.
1900a.
Rules and regulations.
1900b.
Amendment, modification, or repeal of authorizations for execution of contracts for research.
### **CHAPTER 2—SANITATION AND QUARANTINE**

Sec.
81 to 87.
Repealed.
88.
Discharge of cargo of vessel in quarantine.
89.
Quarantine warehouses; erection.
90.
Deposit of goods in warehouses.
91.
Extending time for entry of vessels subject to quarantine.
92 to 96.
Repealed.
97.
State health laws observed by United States officers.
98.
Vessels for quarantine officers.
99 to 111.
Repealed.
112.
Removal of revenue officers from port during epidemic.
113, 114.
Repealed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LE’ELDRED PALM, I,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

GO DADDY.COM, INC.; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-15919

D.C. No. 2:14-cv-01656-SRB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 16, 2016**

Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and BERZON, Circuit Judges. 

Le’Eldred Palm, I, appeals pro se from the district court’s orders denying his 

motions for reconsideration in his action alleging violations of the Sherman Act. We 

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

The filing of the second and third motions to reconsider did not toll the time to 

appeal the underlying dismissal or the first motion to reconsider. See Swimmer v. IRS, 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without 

oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

NOV 22 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-15919 

811 F.2d 1343, 1344-45 (9th Cir. 1987), abrogated on other grounds by Briones v. 

Riviera Hotel & Casino, 116 F.3d 379 (9th Cir. 1997). Thus, we do not consider Palm’s 

contentions regarding the merits of the district court’s order dismissing his action, or the

district court’s order denying his first motion for reconsideration, because Palm failed to 

timely file a notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) (notice of appeal must be 

filed within 30 days of judgment); Stephanie-Cardona LLC v. Smith’s Food & Drug 

Ctrs., Inc., 476 F.3d 701, 703 (9th Cir. 2007) (“A timely notice of appeal is a nonwaivable jurisdictional requirement.”); Swimmer, 811 F2.d at 1344-45.

In his opening brief, Palm fails to challenge the district court’s orders denying his 

second and third motions to reconsider the dismissal of his underlying action, and he has 

therefore waived any such challenge. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 

1999) (“[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed 

waived.”); see also Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not 

manufacture arguments for an appellant . . . .”).

We reject as unsupported by the record Palm’s contentions that the district court 

demonstrated prejudice against him or denied him due process.

AFFIRMED.
§ 270.310 Evidence collected by investigation participants who are not NIST employees. Upon receipt of evidence pursuant to an investigation under the Act, each investigation participant who is not a NIST employee shall: ( a ) As soon as practicable, transfer the original evidence to NIST, and retain a copy of the evidence only if necessary to carry out their duties under the investigation; and
( b ) For any evidence that cannot reasonably be duplicated, retain the evidence in accordance with NIST procedures for preserving evidence as described in § 270.330 of this subpart, and upon completion of the duties for which retention of the evidence is necessary, transfer the evidence to NIST.
[68 FR 4694, Jan. 30, 2003, as amended at 68 FR 24345, May 7, 2003]
#### Robert L. Atkinson, Respondent, v. Martin Fireproofing Corporation, Appellant.

Present — Taylor, P. J., McCurn, Vaughan, Kimball and Piper, JJ.
### §3118. Personnel training, development, and qualifications

(a) The Secretary shall provide a program of ongoing professional training and development for Department of Veterans Affairs counseling and rehabilitation personnel engaged in providing rehabilitation services under this chapter. The objective of such training shall be to insure that rehabilitation services for disabled veterans are provided in accordance with the most advanced knowledge, methods, and techniques available for the rehabilitation of handicapped persons. For this purpose, the Secretary may employ the services of consultants and may make grants to and contract with public or private agencies (including institutions of higher learning) to conduct such training and development.

(b) The Secretary shall coordinate with the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration in the Department of Education and the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment in the Department of Labor in planning and carrying out personnel training in areas of mutual programmatic concern.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall establish such qualifications for personnel providing evaluation and rehabilitation services to veterans under this chapter and for employees performing the functions described in section 3106(f) of this title as the Secretary determines are necessary and appropriate to insure the quality of rehabilitation programs under this chapter. In establishing such qualifications, the Secretary shall take into account the qualifications established for comparable personnel under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. ch. 16).

(Added Pub. L. 96–466, title I, §101(a), Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2184, §1518; amended Pub. L. 101–237, title IV, §423(b)(1), Dec. 18, 1989, 103 Stat. 2092; renumbered §3118 and amended Pub. L. 102–83, §5(a), (c)(1), Aug. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 406; Pub. L. 104–275, title I, §101(f)(2)(C), Oct. 9, 1996, 110 Stat. 3325.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. ch. 16), referred to in subsec. (c), is Pub. L. 93–112, Sept. 26, 1973, 87 Stat. 355, which is classified generally to chapter 16 (§701 et seq.) of Title 29, Labor. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 701 of Title 29 and Tables.

#### Prior Provisions

Prior section 3118 was renumbered section 5318 of this title.

#### Amendments

1996—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–275 substituted "3106(f)" for "3106(e)".

1991—Pub. L. 102–83, §5(a), renumbered section 1518 of this title as this section.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 102–83, §5(c)(1), substituted "3106(e)" for "1506(e)".

1989—Pub. L. 101–237 substituted "Secretary" and "Department of Veterans Affairs" for "Administrator" and "Veterans' Administration", respectively, wherever appearing.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1980, see section 802(a)(2) of Pub. L. 96–466, set out as a note under section 3100 of this title.
#### § 930.5 State enforcement action.

The regulations in this part are not intended in any way to alter or limit other legal remedies, including judicial review or State enforcement, otherwise available. State agencies and Federal agencies should first use the various remedial action and mediation sections of this part to resolve their differences or to enforce State agency concurrences or objections.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 23, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 68138]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25910]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Fossil Energy

[FE Docket No. 04-107-NG]


Cascade Natural Gas Corporation; Order Granting Authority To 
Import Natural Gas From Canada

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of order.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) gives notice that it issued 
DOE/FE Order No. 2046 granting Cascade Natural Gas Corporation 
authority to import up to 7.3 billion cubic feet of natural gas 
annually from Canada, over a term of four years that began on November 
1, 2004. The natural gas will be imported under a Gas Transaction 
Agreement with Nexen Marketing.
    This Order may be found on the FE Web site at http://www.fe.doe.gov 
(select gas regulation). It is also available for inspection and 
copying in the Office of Natural Gas Regulatory Activities Docket Room, 
3E-033, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, 
DC 20585-0334, (202) 586-9478. The Docket Room is open from 8 a.m. to 
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Issued in Washington, DC, November 17, 2004.
R.F. Corbin,
Manager, Natural Gas Regulatory Activities, Office of Global Supply and 
Security, Office of Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 04-25910 Filed 11-22-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS MAY 19 IN WILMINGTON, N.C., ON 

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR PROPOSED ENRICHMENT PLANT 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold two public meetings May 19 in 

Wilmington, N.C., to seek comments about specific issues that should be addressed in its 

environmental review of a proposed uranium enrichment facility. 

 The meetings will be held at the Warwick Center, Ballroom 1, at the University of North 

Carolina at Wilmington, from 1 to 4 p.m., and 7 to 10 p.m. NRC staff members will be available 

for an hour prior to each meeting to speak informally to members of the public. 

 General Electric-Hitachi Global Laser Enrichment, LLC, (GLE) submitted the 

environmental report Jan. 30, as one part of an application for a 40-year license to construct and 

operate a laser-based uranium enrichment facility at the existing General Electric/Global Nuclear 

Fuels-Americas site near Wilmington. GLE has indicated it intends to file the rest of its 

application – pertaining to safety aspects of the facility – by the end of June. 

 The proposed facility would enrich uranium for use in the production of fuel for 

commercial nuclear power reactors. 

 In March, the NRC staff determined that the environmental report was sufficiently 

complete to allow the agency to begin its formal environmental review. A notice of intent to 

prepare an environmental impact statement was published April 9 in the Federal Register. 

 At the May 19 meetings, NRC staff will explain the licensing review process and provide 

ample opportunity for the public to speak about what specific environmental issues should be 

addressed in the report. Members of the public wishing to make statements are encouraged to 

pre-register by May 8 by contacting Antoinette Walker-Smith at (800) 368-5642, ext. 6390. 

Interested persons may also register to speak at the meeting, and written comments will also be 

accepted. 

### 

NOTE: Anyone wishing to take photos or use a camera to record any portion of a NRC meeting should 

contact the Office of Public Affairs beforehand. 

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 09-081 May 5, 2009
No. II-13-023 April 22, 2013

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 997-4417 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

 Joey Ledford (404) 997-4416

NRC SCHEDULES MEETING IN ROCK HILL TO DISCUSS ANNUAL 

ASSESSMENT OF CATAWBA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a meeting for April 29 to 

discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance during 2012 for the Catawba nuclear 

power plant. The plant, operated by Duke Energy, is near York, S.C., about 18 miles south of 

Charlotte.

The meeting is scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m. in the Rock Hill City Hall, 155 Johnston 

St. in Rock Hill. After a presentation, the NRC staff will be available to answer questions about 

the safety performance of the Catawba plant as well as overall NRC oversight and inspection. 

Overall, the NRC staff concluded that both units at the Catawba plant operated safely in

2012. Catawba Unit 2 was subject to normal NRC oversight during 2012, but Unit 1 had 

increased oversight and inspection during the final quarter of 2012 due to an event earlier in the 

year involving an inoperable offsite power supply. The NRC recently completed an inspection 

that found the plant staff had appropriately addressed that issue, and Unit 1 has now returned to 

normal oversight and inspection. 

The NRC staff also plans to conduct inspections related to underground piping and spent 

fuel storage as well as operator licensing examinations at the Catawba plant this year. 

Inspections are carried out by the NRC resident inspectors assigned to the plant and by

specialized inspectors from the Region II office in Atlanta. 

“The NRC inspects nuclear plants and monitors their performance on an ongoing basis,” 

said NRC Region II Administrator Victor McCree. “We issue inspection reports throughout the 

year and we hold these annual meetings near each plant to discuss our oversight and answer any 

questions local residents may have.”

Inspection findings and performance indicators for Catawba and other nuclear plants are 

updated on the NRC’s website each quarter. 

The annual assessment letter for Catawba Units 1 and 2 is available on the NRC website. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II

245 Peachtree Center Ave. NE, Suite 1200

Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

Web Site: www.nrc.gov
Current performance information for Catawba Unit 1 and Unit 2 is also available on the 

NRC website and that information is updated quarterly.

###

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.
### SUBCHAPTER II—EXPANSION OF HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT BEYOND THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION AND LOW-EARTH ORBIT
### SUBCHAPTER XXI—SEX OFFENDER APPREHENSION GRANTS; JUVENILE SEX OFFENDER TREATMENT GRANTS