alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 719.2 Violations of the Act subject to administrative and criminal enforcement proceedings. ( a ) *Violations* — ( 1 ) *Refusal to permit entry or inspection.* No person may willfully fail or refuse to permit entry or inspection, or disrupt, delay or otherwise impede an inspection, authorized by the Act.
( 2 ) *Failure to establish or maintain records.* No person may willfully fail or refuse: ( i ) To establish or maintain any record required by the Act or the CWCR; or
( ii ) To submit any report, notice, or other information to the United States Government in accordance with the Act or the CWCR; or
( iii ) To permit access to or copying of any record required to be established or maintained by the Act or the CWCR, including any record that is exempt from disclosure under the Act or the CWCR.
( b ) *Civil penalties* — ( 1 ) *Civil penalty for refusal to permit entry or inspection.* Any person that is determined to have willfully failed or refused to permit entry or inspection, or to have disrupted, delayed or otherwise impeded an authorized inspection, as set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, shall pay a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $25,000 for each violation. Each day the violation continues constitutes a separate violation.
( 2 ) *Civil penalty for failure to establish or maintain records.* Any person that is determined to have willfully failed or refused to establish or maintain any record or submit any report, notice, or other information required by the Act or the CWCR, or to have willfully failed or refused to permit access to or copying of any record, including any record exempt from disclosure under the Act or the CWCR as set forth in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, shall pay a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $5,000 for each violation.
( c ) *Criminal penalty.* Any person that knowingly violates the Act by willfully failing or refusing to permit entry or inspection authorized by the Act; or by willfully disrupting, delaying or otherwise impeding an inspection authorized by the Act; or by willfully failing or refusing to establish or maintain any required record, or to submit any required report, notice, or other information; or by willfully failing or refusing to permit access to or copying of any record, including records exempt from disclosure under the Act or the CWCR, shall, in addition to or in lieu of any civil penalty that may be imposed, be fined under Title 18 of the United States Code, be imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
( d ) *Denial of export privileges.* Any person in the United States or any U.S. national may be subject to a denial of export privileges after notice and opportunity for hearing pursuant to part 720 of the CWCR if that person has been convicted under Title 18, section 229 of the United States Code.
DENIED and Opinion Filed July 5, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00577-CV No. 05-24-00580-CV No. 05-24-00581-CV IN RE LEONARD MCKEITH HILL, Relator Original Proceedings from the Criminal District Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F-2154278, F-2159441, F-2253217 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Goldstein, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Reichek In his May 14, 2024 petition for writ of mandamus, relator contends that the trial court failed to give him jail-time credit on his se ntence when the sentence was imposed pursuant to article 42.03 of the Te xas Code of Criminal Procedure and that the trial court has since failed or refused to correct the judgment to reflect the appropriate credit despite relator’s multiple nunc pro tunc motions raising the issue. Mandamus relief is generally availa ble to address such a failure. See Ex parte Ybarra , 149 S.W.3d 147, 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). However, we are unable to consid er whether it would be appropriate here–2– because relator failed to provide competent evidence supporting his contentions and his petition otherwise does not meet th e requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure for consid eration of mandamus relief. See In re Backusy , No. 05-23-00674-CV, 2023 WL 4540278, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 14, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); see also T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.3(a)–(h), 52.3(j), 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1), 52.7(a)(2). For example, relator failed to file w ith his petition an appendix or record containing certified or sworn copies of the documents showing the matter complained of and any other documents material to his cl aim for relief, such as the judgment and relator’s nunc pro tunc motions. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1); In re Skinner , No. 05-23-00930-CV, 2023 WL 6618295, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 11, 2023, orig. proceed ing) (mem. op.) (explaining that it is relator’s burden to provide the Court with a sufficient record to show entitlement to mandamus relief). Additionally, relator omitted the rule 52. 3(j) certification required for consideration of mandamus relief. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.3(j); In re Stewart , No. 05-19-01338-CV, 2020 WL 401764, at *1 (T ex. App.—Dallas Jan. 24, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (explaining that our precedent requires “exceptionally strict compliance” with rule 52.3(j)).–3– Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

240577F.P05 /Amanda L. Reichek / AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00053-CV

J. CURT LUCAS AND INVENIAS 

PARTNERS LLC, Appellants

V.

CYNDI RAMIREZ RYAN, Appellees

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from

County Court at Law No. 2

of Denton County (CV-2016-02101)

June 27, 2019

Opinion by Justice Kerr

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was error in part of the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the 

trial court is affirmed in part, reversed and rendered in part, and reversed and 

remanded in part. We affirm the trial court’s order denying Appellants J. Curt Lucas’s

and Invenias Partners LLC’s special appearances. We reverse the trial court’s 

judgment; render judgment that Appellee Cyndi Ramirez Ryan take nothing on her 

claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and negligent misrepresentation; 
and remand Ryan’s quantum-meruit claim to the trial court for a new trial on both 

liability and damages.

We order Lucas and Invenias to pay one-half of the costs of this appeal and 

Ryan to pay one-half of the costs of this appeal.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Elizabeth Kerr__________________

 Justice Elizabeth Kerr
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN
NO. 03- 08 -00 538 -CV Te xa s A lc oho lic Be ve r ag e Co m m iss ion , e t a l. , A ppe lla nt
v. Gr een Star, Inc., a Texas Cor poration; and T he Silver City Club, an Unin corporat ed Mem bership O rganization , Appellees F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- GN-05- 0036 60 , HO NORAB LE GISELA D. TRIANA-DO Y AL , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

NO. 03-08-00572- CV In re Texas Alcoholic Bever age Com m ission ORI GINAL PRO CEEDING FRO M TRAVIS CO UNTY

NO. 03-08-00616- CV Te xa s A lc oho lic Be ve r ag e Co m m iss ion , C hai r m an J ohn St e e n; M e m be r s J os e Cue va s a nd Steven M. We inb erg M .D., In Th eir Off icial Capacities; and Alan S tee n, Adminstrat or of The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Com m ission , et al., Appellants
v. The Si lver City Club, an Unincorporated Me m bership O rganization;

and Gree n Star, Inc., Appellees F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- GN-05- 0036 60, H ONO RAB LE DARLENE B Y RNE, JUDGE P RESIDINGTh e Silv e r C ity Clu b and Gr e e n Star, Inc . (t

he pr ivate pa

rt ie s) fi le d the ir mot ion to d ism iss 1 the ir a pp e a l in c a us e numbe r 0 3- 08 -0 06 73 -C V o n M arc h 2 7, 20 09 . T he State pa rt ie s f ile d th e ir motion to di smiss on April 7, 2009, st atingit was conting ent upon this Cou rt ’s d i s missal of the pr ivate pa rt ie s’ a pp e a l and c e rt if

ying that the pr ivate pa

rt ie s w e re no t op po se d to the State pa rt ie s’ conting ent motion. 2 NO. 03-08-00673- CV The Si lver City Club, an Unincorporated Me m bership O rganization; and Gree n Star, Inc., a Texas Corporation, Appellan ts
v. The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Com m ission ; its Chairm an John Steen; and its m em bers Jose Cuevas and Steven M. Weinberg, M .D., all sued h ere in their off icial capacities only; and Alan Steen, Adm inis trat or of the Texas Alcoholic Bever age Com m ission , et al., Appellees F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- GN-05- 0036 60, H ONO RAB LE MARGARET A. COO P ER, JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D UM O P I N I O N Th e pa rt ie s h ave fi le d uno pp os e d moti on s to di smi ss t he ir a pp e a ls a nd pr oc e e din g s. 1 We grant the parties’ motions and dismiss cause numbers 03-08-00673- CV, 03-08-00538-CV, 03- 08-00572-CV, a

nd 03-08-00616- CV.

__________________________________________ David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Pury ear and He nson Dismissed on Ag ree d Motions Filed: Apr il 22, 2009
§ 1210.15 Specifications. ( a ) *Requirement.* Before any lighters that are subject to the standard are distributed in commerce, the manufacturer or importer shall ensure that the surrogate lighters used for qualification testing under § 1210.14 are described in a written product specification. (Section 1210.4(c) requires that six surrogate lighters be used for testing each 100-child panel.)
( b ) *Contents of specification.* The product specification shall include the following information: ( 1 ) A complete description of the lighter, including size, shape, weight, fuel, fuel capacity, ignition mechanism, and child-resistant features.
( 2 ) A detailed description of all dimensions, force requirements, or other features that could affect the child-resistance of the lighter, including the manufacturer's tolerances for each such dimension or force requirement.
( 3 ) Any further information, including, but not limited to, model names or numbers, necessary to adequately describe the lighters and any child-resistant features.
#### Bruner & Neligh, plaintiffs in error, v. Dona Folk, defendant in error.

1. Appeal from Probate Judge. A party appealing from a judgment of a probate judge has ten days "within which to give the undertaking in appeal; and until the second day of the term next thereafter to deliver the transcript to the clerk of the appellate court. ‘

2. -. The case of *Smails v. White, 4 Neb.,*353, cited with approval.

Error to the district court for Cuming county.

*Uriah Bruner,*for plaintiff in error.

Lake, Ch. J.

The only error complained of is in the order of the court below dismissing the appeal from the judgment of the probate judge.

It appears that the judgment from which the appeal was taken was rendered on the fourth day of October, 1875. The undertaking in appeal was filed and approved within eight days thereafter, and the transcript, in due form, was filed in the district court on the eighteenth day of October, some two weeks before the term next following the rendition of the judgment appealed from.

The order dismissing this appeal was doubtless based upon the act “ regulating the taking of appeals from the judgments of probate judges and justices of the peace,” approved February 24, 1875, which, in effect, limited the time for perfecting such appeals to ten days from their rendition. But that act having been declared to be unconstitutional *(Smails v. White,*4 Neb., 353), and all the requisite steps to a valid appeal under the law as it stood at the time of its passage having been duly taken, *85it follows that tbe motion to dismiss should have been overruled.

The judgment of the court below is, therefore, reversed, and the appeal reinstated.

Judgment accordingly.
§ 305.6 Description of plumbing products. ( a ) *Showerhead* means a component or set of components distributed in commerce for attachment to a single supply fitting, for spraying water onto a bather, typically from an overhead position, excluding safety shower showerheads.
( b ) *Faucet* means a lavatory faucet, kitchen faucet, metering faucet, or replacement aerator for a lavatory or kitchen faucet.
( c ) *Water closet* means a plumbing fixture having a water-containing receptor which receives liquid and solid body waste and, upon actuation, conveys the waste through an exposed integral trap seal into a gravity drainage system, except such term does not include fixtures designed for installation in prisons.
( d ) *Urinal* means a plumbing fixture that receives only liquid body waste and, on demand, conveys the waste through a trap seal into a gravity drainage system, except such term does not include fixtures designed for installation in prisons.
[84 FR 58032, Oct. 30, 2019]
No: III-14-036 October 8, 2014

CONTACT: Viktoria Mitlyng 630-829-9662

 Prema Chandrathil 630-829-9663

NRC Names New Resident Inspector at Byron Nuclear Station

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has selected Jason Draper as the new resident inspector at 

the Byron Nuclear Power Plant in Byron, Ill., approximately 17 miles southwest of Rockford. The 

nuclear power facility is operated by Exelon Generation Co.

Draper joined the NRC in 2007 as a reactor engineer in Region III. 

Originally from Walnut, Ill., Draper holds a bachelor’s degree in nuclear 

engineering with a minor in mathematics from the University of Illinois.

“Jason Draper is an excellent inspector with a firm commitment to safety. 

He will help the NRC fulfill its mission of protecting people and the environment 

by helping ensure the Byron plant follows the high safety standards set by the 

NRC,” said Region III Administrator Cynthia D. Pederson.

Each commercial nuclear power plant site in the United States has at least 

two NRC resident inspectors. They serve as the agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, conducting 

inspections, monitoring major work projects and interacting with plant workers and the public. Draper 

joins Senior Resident Inspector Jim McGhee at the facility. Both inspectors can be reached at (815) 

234-5451.
|         |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|---------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| • | the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2015 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |

|         |                                                                                                                                                      |
|---------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| • | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |  |
| Dated: | November 3, 2015 | By   | /s/ Thomas F. Motamed   |   |
|   |   |   | Thomas F. Motamed  |   |
|   |   |   | Chief Executive Officer  |   |
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 40307 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
SERGIO ESTRADA

- ZAMARRIPA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:15

- CR

- 494

- 1

Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Sergio Estrada

Zamarripa has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Estrada

- Zamarripa has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected
therein , as well as Estrada

- Zamarripa ’ s response . We concur with counsel’s

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 20 , 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-40307 Document: 00513804545 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2016No. 16

- 40307

2 assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 16-40307 Document: 00513804545 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2016
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20020805140441/http://www.census.gov:80/industry/ma2...

Current Industrial Reports

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

Bureau of the Census

Fertilizer Materials - 1997

MA28B(97)-1

Issued October 9, 1998

Information about the scope of the survey, methodology, explanation of terms,

and historical notes for this survey may be found in the 1996 Manufacturing

Profiles issued July 1998.

These data are also available through the U.S. Department of Commerce and

STAT-USA Electronic Bulletin Board by subscription. To access, dial 202-482-3870

and follow the prompts to register. Also, you may call 202-482-1986 or 1-800-STAT-USA,

for further information. The Internet address is: stat-usa.gov/.

For mail or fax copies of the publication, contact the Manufacturing and Construction

Division information Center, 301-457-4673.

Address inquiries concerning these data to U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of

the Census, Manufacturing and Construction Division, Washington, D.C. 20233, or call

Walter R. Hunter, Jr., 301-457-4798.

Summary of Findings

United States production of sulfuric acid in 1997 totaled 48,018.0

thousand short tons (100 percent H2SO4), approximately 1 percent above

the 1996 figure of 47,770.3 thousand short tons. Value of shipments,

including interplant transfers in 1997 amounted to $528.3 million, as

compared to the 1996 value of $578.1 million.

Value of shipments of synthetic ammonia, nitric acid, and ammonium

compounds decreased 9 percent to $3,494.0 million in 1997 from the 1996

level of $3,818.8 million. Shipments of urea decreased 15 percent to $772.3

million in 1997, and shipments of phosphoric acid increased 14.5 percent

to $1,405.1 million.

Production of superphosphate and other phosphatic fertilizer materials

for 1997 decreased 1 percent to 10,431.4 thousand short tons (100 percent P2O5).

Value of shipments amounted to $3,674.9 million in 1997, as compared to the 1996

value of $3,927.6 million.

Table 1. Shipments and Production of Principal Fertilizer Materials: 1997 to 1993

[Quantity in thousands of short tons. Value in millions of dollars]

 Total shipments

 including interplant

 Product description transfers

 Value

Product Total (f.o.b.

 code Year production Quantity plant)

28731 31 Ammonia, synthetic anhydrous 1/............. 1997 17,340.4 8,588.6 1,591.9

 1996 17,922.8 9,919.1 1,689.7

1995 17,402.2 9,722.8 1,661.6

1994 17,869.1 10,525.3 1,540.8

1993 17,195.2 10,435.5 1,174.3

28731 44 Ammonium nitrate, original melt liquor 2/... 1997 8,604.4 (X) (X)

1996 8 497 8 (X) (X)
September 22, 2014 

MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Junge, Chief 

 Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch 

 Division of Construction Inspection & Operational Programs 

 Office of New Reactors 

FROM: Rick Pelton /RA/

 Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch 

Division of Construction Inspection & Operational Programs

Office of New Reactors

SUBJECT: NOTICE OF FORTHCOMING CLOSED MEETING WITH THE AP-1000 

OWNERS GROUP ON NEW REACTOR OPERATOR LICENSING 

DATE & TIME: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 

8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. 

LOCATION: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Two White Flint North, Auditorium 

11545 Rockville Pike 

Rockville, MD 20852 

PURPOSE: The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the Baseline 7 operating 

platform and integrated system validation. 

PARTICIPANTS: Participants from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC) include members of the Office of New Reactors (NRO) and the 

AP1000 Owners Group on New Reactor Operator Licensing. 

NRC AP1000 Owners Group

M. Junge, NRO Paul Mothena 

T. Jackson, NRO Mark Verbeck 

Staff, et. al Rick Connelly 

MEETING CONTACT: Rick Pelton, NRO/DCIP/COLB 

(301) 415-1028 
MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Junge, Chief 

 Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch 

 Division of Construction Inspection & Operational Programs 

 Office of New Reactors 

FROM: Rick Pelton /RA/

 Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch 

Division of Construction Inspection & Operational Programs

Office of New Reactors

SUBJECT: NOTICE OF FORTHCOMING CLOSED MEETING WITH THE AP-1000 

OWNERS GROUP ON NEW REACTOR OPERATOR LICENSING 

DATE & TIME: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 

8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. 

LOCATION: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Two White Flint North, Auditorium 

11545 Rockville Pike 

Rockville, MD 20852 

PURPOSE: The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the Baseline 7 operating 

platform and integrated system validation. 

PARTICIPANTS: Participants from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC) include members of the Office of New Reactors (NRO) and the 

AP1000 Owners Group on New Reactor Operator Licensing. 

NRC AP1000 Owners Group

M. Junge, NRO Paul Mothena 

T. Jackson, NRO Mark Verbeck 

Staff, et. al Rick Connelly 

MEETING CONTACT: Rick Pelton, NRO/DCIP/COLB 

(301) 415-1028 

Enclosure:

Agenda 

DISTRIBUTION: 

RidsNroOd RidsEDOMailCenter AValentin 

RidsNroDcip RidsOgcMailCenter MCheok 

RidsNroDcipColp RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter TJackson 

ADAMS Accession No.: ML14262A166 NRC-001 

OFFICE NRO/DCIP/IOLB NRO/DCIP/IOLB 

NAME RPelton MJunge 

DATE 9/22/14 9/22/14 

 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
ENCLOSURE 

AGENDA FOR THE CLOSED MEETING WITH THE 

AP1000 OWNERS GROUP ON NEW REACTOR OPERATOR LICENSING 

Wednesday, October 1, 2014 

8:30 – 12:00 p.m. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Two White Flint North, Auditorium 

11545 Rockville Pike 

Rockville, MD 20852 

Introductions and Opening Remarks All 

Baseline 7 Operating Platform All 

Integrated System Validation All 

Summary / Conclusion / Action Item Review All
Incorporation by Reference 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0291

October 21, 2014

The contents of the following dockets are hereby incorporated by reference into and are 

considered to be included in, contained in, and to have been placed in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR2013-0291 (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Brick and Structural 

Clay Products Manufacturing): 

1) A-99-30 (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Brick and 

Structural Clay Products Manufacturing; Proposed Rule)

2) OAR-2002-0054 (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing; Final Rule)

Accessing dockets: 

Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West Building, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744 and the telephone number for the EPA

Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.