alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas September 17, 2021 No. 04-21-00374-CV IN THE INTEREST OF M.A. III, J.E.A., F.E.A., F.A.A., R.L., JR., AND B.J.L.

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019-PA-02352 Honorable Peter A. Sakai, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R On August 4, 2021, the trial court signed a final judgment terminating appellant’s parental rights to her children. Because this is an accelerated appeal, the notice of appeal was due to be filed on August 24, 2021. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 4.1(a), 26.1(b), 28.4. A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due to be filed on September 8, 2021. See id. R. 26.3. On September 1, 2021, appellant filed her notice of appeal. Although appellant filed a notice of appeal within the fifteen-day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3, she did not file a motion for extension of time. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the fifteen-day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. See id. ; T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C); see also Hone v. Hanafin , 104 S.W.3d 884, 886–87 (Tex. 2003) (holding “a reasonable explanation” is any plausible statement of circumstances indicating that failure to timely file was not deliberate or intentional but was the result of inadvertence, mistake or mischance, and that “any conduct short of deliberate or intentional noncompliance qualifies as inadvertence, mistake or mischance”) (citation ommitted). It is therefore ORDERED that appellant file, within seven days from the date of this order, a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file a notice of appeal in a timely manner. If appellant fails to respond within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(c).

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 17th day of September, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
#### In the Matter of Robert J. Gray, Deceased.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Dowling, Page and Merrell, JJ.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2480 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain bicycle parts. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2005 

Mr. BLUMENAUER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain bicycle parts. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN BICYCLE PARTS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.87.15 Sets of steel tubing cut to 

exact length and each set 

having the number of tubes 

needed for the assembly 

(with other parts) into the 

frame and fork of one bicycle (provided for in subheading 8714.91.50) ............ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 
2 

•HR 2480 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
§ 212.22 Request for accounting of record disclosures. ( a ) *How made.* Except where accountings of disclosures are not required to be kept, as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section, or where accountings of disclosures do not need to be provided to a requesting individual pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), an individual has a right to request an accounting of any disclosure that the component's FOIA office has made to another person, organization, or agency of any record about an individual. This accounting shall contain the date, nature, and purpose of each disclosure as well as the name and address of the recipient of the disclosure. Any request for accounting should identify each particular record in question and may be made by writing directly to the Appeals Officer, Bureau for Management, Office of Management Services at the address given in § 212.19.
( b ) *Where accountings are not required.* The component's FOIA office is not required to keep an accounting of disclosures in the case of: ( 1 ) Disclosures made to employees within the Agency who have a need for the record in the performance of their duties; and
( 2 ) Disclosures required under the FOIA.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CONSUMER SOLUTIONS REO, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

RUTHIE B. HILLERY, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-08-4357 EMC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST TO CONTINUE

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

(Docket No. 106)

Plaintiff Consumer Solutions REO, LLC has filed a motion asking that the settlement

conference in this case be continued. Defendants have not filed any opposition to the motion. 

Because there is no opposition, and because a continuance is reasonable given the unsettled state of

the pleadings, the Court hereby GRANTS the request for a continuance. The settlement conference

shall be rescheduled by Judge Zimmerman to occur as soon as practicable after the Court rules on

Consumer Solutions’ motion to dismiss.

This order disposes of Docket No. 106.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 27, 2010

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:08-cv-04357-EMC Document 108 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 1
#### John W. B. Coleman, Respondent, v. Charles C. LaRose, Appellant.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted. No opinion. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith, Page and Greenbaum, JJ.
#### Monroe *et al. v.*Baldwin *et al.*

June 13, 1912.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Edwards. Haralson superior court. December 28, 1911.

*Copeland, Hamilton & Hutchens,*for plaintiffs.

*Griffith & Mattheivs,*for defendants.

Hill, J.

There was no error on the part of the court in refusing to grant the injunction prayed for in this case.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the .Justices concur.*
#### Luis Alexander de Leon DE LEON, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-76681.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 12, 2007.*

Filed March 19, 2007.

Jorge Rodriquez-Choi, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Anna S. Peckham, Great Falls, MT, for Respondent.

Before: KOZINSKI, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Luis Alexander De Leon De Leon, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s opinion, *Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that De Leon’s fear of harm is too speculative to form a basis for asylum, because guerillas stopped visiting his parents at the time the 1996 peace accords were signed between the guerillas and the government. *See Nagoulko v. INS,*333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Case 3:08-cv-03470-JSW Document 83 Filed 07/15/10 Page 1 of 2 Case3:08-cv-03470-JSW Document76 Filed07/15/10 Page1 of 3
Case3:08-cv-03470-JSW Document76 Filed07/15/10 Page2 of 3

15

Case 3:08-cv-03470-JSW Document 83 Filed 07/15/10 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4417 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4417

    To suspend temporarily the duty on certain acrylic filament tow.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 19, 2012

Mr. Bishop of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To suspend temporarily the duty on certain acrylic filament tow.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN ACRYLIC FILAMENT TOW.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Acrylic filament    Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          tow                                                               12/31/2015
                          (polyacrylonitril
                          e tow) containing
                          by weight 92
                          percent or more
                          of
                          polyacrylonitrile
                          , not more than
                          0.01 percent of
                          zinc, and 2
                          percent or more
                          but not over 8
                          percent of water,
                          importing in the
                          form of bundles
                          of crimped
                          product of
                          250,000 to
                          350,000 filaments
                          (plus or minus 10
                          percent) with an
                          average decitex
                          of 2.4 to 3.7
                          decitex (plus or
                          minus 10 percent)
                          and length
                          greater than 2
                          meters (provided
                          for in subheading
                          5501.30.00)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §3716a. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3716a was editorially reclassified as section 30504 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALICIA HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

VECTOR MARKETING CORPORATION,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

No. C-08-5198 EMC

ORDER RE TELEPHONIC HEARING

ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

LEAVE TO AMEND

(Docket Nos. 121, 125)

Currently pending before the Court are the parties’ cross-briefs on what is, in effect,

Plaintiff’s request for leave to amend her complaint. Plaintiffs seeks leave to amend her complaint

to include a claim that she and other class members were not paid for the qualified sales

presentations (“QSPs”) they allegedly performed. Having considered the parties’ briefs and

accompanying submissions, as well as all other evidence of record, the Court hereby orders as

follows.

(1) The Court shall hold a telephonic conference call on the matter on April 2, 2010, at

2:30 p.m. The parties shall immediately contact the Courtroom Deputy, Betty Lee, at (415) 522-

2034 to provide telephone numbers for participating counsel.

(2) By 12:00 p.m. of April 1, 2010, Plaintiff shall file and serve a statement describing

in detail the discovery she wishes to take to support the QSP claim for purposes of class

certification. Plaintiff must be specific, both in terms of the written discovery and oral discovery. In

addition, if Plaintiff believes that a sampling is sufficient for purposes of class certification, then she

Case 3:08-cv-05198-EMC Document 127 Filed 03/30/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

must provide details as to what would constitute an adequate sampling. Plaintiff should not only efile but also fax a copy to the Court at (415) 522-4200.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 30, 2010

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:08-cv-05198-EMC Document 127 Filed 03/30/10 Page 2 of 2
Unassociated Document


     Crewmen
Assignment Supplemental Agreement

    


    (Unofficial
Translation)

    


    Party A (Lesser): Fujian
Lutong Highway Engineering Construction Co., Ltd.

    Address: Room1705 &1706,
Floor 17, Yinhe Garden Hotel, 243 Wusi Road, Fuzhou City

    Legal Representative: LIN
Xiuzhen

    


    Party B (Lessee): Fujian Xing
Gang Port Service Co., Ltd.

    Address: Floor 17, Tower A,
Zhongshan Building, 154 Hudong Road, Fuzhou City.

    Legal Representative: LIN Qing

    


    Whereas
the two parties entered into Supplemental Ship Lease
Agreement on April 11th, 2010,
through friendly consultation, Party A and Party B agree upon the following
supplements to the Crew
Allocation Agreement executed on May 20th,
2008:

    


    
      	
              1.

            	
              As
      the lease term of Xing Gangjun 9 is renewed until May 31st,
      2016, the term of the crew allocation designated in the original agreement
      is renewed accordingly until May 31st,
      2010 upon the expiration of the original
  agreement;

            


    

    
      	
              2.

            	
              Refer
      to the attached Crew
      Allocation List for the structure and number of the crew members
      provided by Party A;

            


    

    
      	
              3.

            	
              The
      crew allocation fees designated in the original agreement stay unchanged
      at RMB three hundred thousand yuan even (¥300,000.00 yuan) per
      month.  The payment is made by
season;

            


    

    
      	
              4.

            	
              The
      crew allocation fees include salaries, benefits, social insurances
      (including but not limited to endowment insurance, unemployment insurance,
      medical care insurance, maternity insurance, employment injuries
      insurance, housing fund, and commercial insurance) and bonus that Party A
      is obliged to pay to the crew members of Xing Gangjun 9.  Party
      A is responsible for the social insurance and benefits of the
      crew;

            


    

    
      	
              5.

            	
              After
      the term expires in 2016, under the same conditions, Party B has the
      priority to hire the crew given that Party B continue to lease ships from
      Party A;

            


    

    
      	
              6.

            	
              Party
      A ensures that all crew members possess the professional skills and
      required licenses corresponding to their
work.

            


    

    
      	
              7.

            	
              Other
      items in the original agreement do not
change.

            


    

    
      	
              8.

            	
              This
      supplemental agreement has the same legal validity as the original
      agreement.

            


    

     

    Party A: Fujian Lutong Highway
Engineering Construction Co., Ltd. (Seal)

    Legal Representative: LIN
Xiuzhen /s/

    


    Party B: Fujian Xing Gang Port
Co., Ltd. (Seal)

    Legal Representative: LIN Qing
/s/

    


    Date of execution: May 21st,
2010
### §4851a. Purposes

The purposes of this chapter are—

(1) to develop a national strategy to build the infrastructure necessary to eliminate lead-based paint hazards in all housing as expeditiously as possible;

(2) to reorient the national approach to the presence of lead-based paint in housing to implement, on a priority basis, a broad program to evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards in the Nation's housing stock;

(3) to encourage effective action to prevent childhood lead poisoning by establishing a workable framework for lead-based paint hazard evaluation and reduction and by ending the current confusion over reasonable standards of care;

(4) to ensure that the existence of lead-based paint hazards is taken into account in the development of Government housing policies and in the sale, rental, and renovation of homes and apartments;

(5) to mobilize national resources expeditiously, through a partnership among all levels of government and the private sector, to develop the most promising, cost-effective methods for evaluating and reducing lead-based paint hazards;

(6) to reduce the threat of childhood lead poisoning in housing owned, assisted, or transferred by the Federal Government; and

(7) to educate the public concerning the hazards and sources of lead-based paint poisoning and steps to reduce and eliminate such hazards.

(Pub. L. 102–550, title X, §1003, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3897.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning title X of Pub. L. 102–550, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3897, known as the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4851 of this title and Tables.
#### In the Matter of Gary Jarvis, Appellant, v Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services et al., Respondents.

[714 NYS2d 825]

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Ceresia, Jr., J.), entered February 16, 2000 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services denying petitioner’s application for a certificate of earned eligibility.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, was denied a certificate of earned eligibility based upon his overall unacceptable level of program attendance and was apparently denied parole release due in *557part to his failure to obtain the certificate. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the determination denying the certificate and Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding that the determination was not arbitrary or capricious and was supported by a rational basis. We affirm.

The denial of a certificate of earned eligibility is an interlocutory determination which may be considered by the Board of Parole in deciding a request for parole release *(see, Matter of Frett v Coughlin,*156 AD2d 779, 781). Inasmuch as petitioner’s challenge is directed only at the denial of the certificate of earned eligibility and not to the denial of parole, the petition should have been dismissed on the ground that it seeks review of a nonfinal order *(see, id.,*at 781). In any event, were we to review the issue, we would find that petitioner’s acknowledged failure to fully participate in a sex offender treatment program provides a rational basis for the discretionary denial of a certificate of earned eligibility *(see generally,*Correction Law § 805).

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Spain, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 73 
          - [DA 04-3616; MM Docket No. 02-212; RM-10516, RM-10618] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission. 

# ACTION:

Final rule. 

# SUMMARY:

                        This document denies a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Charles Crawford directed to the                         *Report and Order*                         in this proceeding.                         *See*69 FR 29241, May 21, 2004. With this action, the proceeding is terminated.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Hayne, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2177. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This is a synopsis of the                     *Memorandum Opinion and Order*                     in MM Docket No.02-212 adopted November 24, 2004, and released November 26, 2004. The full text of this decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center at Portals ll, CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or                     *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.*                     The Commission will not send a copy of this                     *Memorandum Opinion and Order*                     pursuant to the Congressional Review Act,                     *see*5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the petition was reconsideration was denied.                 

Federal Communications Commission. 

John A. Karousos, 

Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 04-27796 Filed 12-17-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P