alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1006.205 Development. ( a ) NHHBG funds may be used for the acquisition, new construction, reconstruction, or moderate or substantial rehabilitation of affordable housing for homeownership or rental, which may include: ( 1 ) Real property acquisition;
( 2 ) Acquisition of affordable housing;
( 3 ) Financing acquisition of affordable housing by homebuyers through: ( i ) Down payment assistance;
( ii ) Closing costs assistance;
( iii ) Direct lending; and
( iv ) Interest subsidies or other financial assistance
( 4 ) New construction of affordable housing;
( 5 ) Reconstruction of affordable housing;
( 6 ) Moderate rehabilitation of affordable housing, including but not limited to: ( i ) Lead-based paint hazards elimination or reduction;
( ii ) Improvements to provide physical accessibility for disabled persons; and
( iii ) Energy-related improvements;
( 7 ) Substantial rehabilitation of affordable housing, including but not limited to: ( i ) Lead-based paint hazards elimination or reduction;
( ii ) Improvements to provide physical accessibility for disabled persons; and
( iii ) Energy-related improvements;
( 8 ) Site improvement, including recreational areas and playgrounds for use by residents of affordable housing and on-site streets and sidewalks;
( 9 ) The development and rehabilitation of utilities, necessary infrastructure, and utility services;
( 10 ) Conversion;
( 11 ) Demolition;
( 12 ) Administration and planning; and
( 13 ) Other related activities, such as environmental review and architectural and engineering plans for the affordable housing project.
( b ) *Multi-unit projects.* NHHBG funds may be used to assist one or more housing units in a multi-unit project. Only the actual NHHBG eligible development costs of the assisted units may be charged to the NHHBG Program. If the assisted and unassisted units are not comparable, the actual costs may be determined based upon a method of cost allocation. If the assisted and unassisted units are comparable in terms of size, features, and number of bedrooms, the actual cost of the NHHBG-assisted units can be determined by pro-rating the total NHHBG eligible development costs of the project so that the proportion of the total development costs charged to the NHHBG Program does not exceed the proportion of the NHHBG-assisted units in the project.
[67 FR 40776, June 13, 2002, as amended at 89 FR 9761, Feb. 12, 2024]
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-2281

)

STANLEY RAPHAEL JEAN, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed May 3, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Manatee

County; Edward Nicholas, Judge.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Katie Salemi Ashby, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for

Appellant.

Peter Lombardo of Law Office of Peter

Lombardo, Bradenton, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We treat this State appeal from an order to disclose the identity of a 

confidential informant as a petition for writ of certiorari and grant it. See, e.g., State v. 

Borrego, 970 So. 2d 465, 466 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that an order requiring 

disclosure of a confidential informant was reviewable by way of certiorari where there 

was no adequate remedy on appeal); State v. Devoid, 706 So. 2d 924, 925 (Fla. 2d 
- 2 -

DCA 1998) (same). The trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by 

ordering the disclosure without first conducting the in-camera hearing the law 

requires. See State v. Roberts, 686 So. 2d 722, 723 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) ("Once a 

defendant carries an initial burden of showing that disclosure is necessary to a specific 

defense, the trial court should hold an in camera hearing to determine, in fact, whether 

the disclosure would be relevant and helpful to the defense."); see also Bailey v. State, 

994 So. 2d 1256, 1258 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) ("When a defendant files a sworn motion or 

affidavit alleging facts regarding the informant's involvement that, if true, would support 

the possibility of a specific defense, the trial court is required to conduct an in-camera 

hearing to consider the necessity of the informant's testimony and the State's interest in 

nondisclosure."). We accordingly quash the order to disclose the identity of the 

confidential informant.

Petition granted; order quashed.

SILBERMAN, LUCAS, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
[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 (CGP).
**Title:****Compilation of information on salmon andsteelhead losses in the Columbia River Basin [electronic resource].
 
SuDoc Number: Y 3.N 81/8:2/L 89
Item Number:1089-W-04 (online)
CGP System Number:000608313
 
losses_part1.pdf
losses_part2.pdf
losses_part3.pdf
losses_part4.pdf
losses_part5.pdf
losses_part6.pdf
losses_part7.pdf
losses_part8.pdf
 
 
** 
**Permanent Public Access
** 
Title 44 of  the United States Code (44 U.S.C. Section 1911) stipulates that public access  to official Government information products disseminated through the Federal  Depository Library Program (FDLP) must be maintained permanently in regional  depository libraries and by depository libraries not served by a regional  library. Since online products are not physically distributed to depository  libraries for retention, GPO has assumed responsibility for the provision of  permanent access to Government information products residing on FDsys  servers.
GPO's  permanent public access commitment is also met by bringing  agency-disseminated Internet resources under the purview of GPO and  incorporating them into a digital archive. GPO captures copies of agency  electronic information products, and creates PURLs so that users will be  automatically redirected to the archived products if the information is no  longer accessible on the agency Web site. Please refer to the report Managing  the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and Planning Document for more  information.
 
August 3, 2017********
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       1,494,175
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   50,490
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,544,665
<PP&E>                                      32,164,983
<DEPRECIATION>                               (563,665)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,126,333
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          113,521
<BONDS>                                      9,651,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  24,361,812
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,126,333
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               872,659
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  121,100
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             214,067
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                537,492
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            537,492
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 42,433
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   579,925
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 62
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 62 appear at 64 FR 54539, Oct. 7, 1999, and 67 FR 17612, 17613, Apr. 11, 2002.

§ 62.60 Termination of designation Designation will be terminated upon the occurrence of any of the circumstances set forth in this section. ( a ) *Voluntary termination.* A sponsor notifies the Department of its intent to terminate its designation voluntarily and withdraws its program in SEVIS via submission of a “cancel program” request. The sponsor's designation shall terminate upon submission of such notification. Such sponsor may apply for a new program designation.
( b ) *Inactivity.* A sponsor fails to comply with the minimum program size or duration requirements, as specified in § 62.8 (a) and (b), in any 12-month period. Such sponsor may apply for a new program designation.
( c ) *Failure to file annual reports.* A sponsor fails to file annual reports for two (2) consecutive years. Such sponsor is eligible to apply for a new program designation.
( d ) *Failure to file an annual management audit.* A sponsor fails to file an annual management audit, if such audits are required in the relevant program category. Such sponsor is eligible to apply for a new program designation upon the filing of the past due management audit.
( e ) *Change in ownership or control.* An exchange visitor program designation is not assignable or transferable. A major change in ownership or control automatically terminates the designation. However, the successor sponsor may apply for designation of the new entity, and it may continue to administer the exchange visitor activities of the previously-designated program while the application for designation is pending before the Department of State: ( 1 ) With respect to a for-profit corporation, a major change in ownership or control is deemed to have occurred when one third (33.33%) or more of its stock is sold or otherwise transferred within a 12-month period;
( 2 ) With respect to a not-for-profit corporation, a major change of control is deemed to have occurred when 51 percent (51%) or more of the board of trustees or other like body, vested with its management, is replaced within a 12-month period.
( f ) *Non-compliance with other requirements.* A sponsor fails to remain in compliance with Federal, State, local, or professional requirements necessary to carry out the activity for which it is designated, including loss of accreditation, or licensure.
( g ) *Failure to apply for redesignation.* A sponsor fails to apply for redesignation, pursuant to the terms and conditions of § 62.7, prior to the conclusion of its current designation period. If so terminated, the former sponsor may apply for a new program designation, but the program activity will be suspended during the pendency of the application.
Order entered October 19, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00738-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.V., S.V., AND S.V., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 469th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 469-56356-2016

ORDER

We REINSTATE this appeal.

By order dated August 10, 2018, the Court granted the parties’ motion to abate the appeal 

to allow the trial court to sign an amended decree of divorce pursuant to their agreement. On 

October 10, 2018, the Court received a supplemental clerk’s record containing the Amended 

Final Decree of Divorce. In light of this filing, appellant shall file, by October 29, 2018, either a 

motion to dismiss the appeal or a letter explaining why we should not dismiss the appeal as 

moot. We caution appellant that failure to comply may result in dismissal of the appeal without 

further notice. See Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n v. Jones, 1 S.W.3d 83, 86 (Tex. 1999) (case 

becomes moot and court loses jurisdiction if controversy between parties ceases to exist); TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
### §8006. Application procedure for assistance

#### (a) Matters included in application

An application for assistance under this chapter shall include—

(1) a plan specifying the types and priorities of the basic services the public housing agency or nonprofit corporation proposes to provide during the term of the contract; such plan must be related to the needs and characteristics of the eligible project residents and, to the maximum extent practicable, provide for the changing needs and characteristics of all project residents; such plan shall be determined after consultation with eligible project residents and with the professional assessment committee;

(2) a list of names and professional qualifications of the members of the professional assessment committee;

(3) the fee schedule established pursuant to section 8004(h) of this title;

(4) any comment received in connection with any review of a proposed application pursuant to section 8004(d) or 8004(e)(2) of this title; and

(5) a statement affirming (A) that the nonprofit corporation or public housing agency has followed the consultation procedures required in subsections (c), (d), and (e) of section 8004 of this title, and (B) that such application complies with subsection (b) of such section.

#### (b) Deadlines for submission of application

The Secretary shall establish appropriate deadlines for each fiscal year for the submission of applications for funding under this chapter and shall notify any public housing agency and nonprofit corporation applying for assistance under this chapter of acceptance or rejection of its application within ninety days of such submission.

#### (c) Review of performance of services program prior to submission of application for renewed funding

Within twelve months prior to the submission of an application for renewed funding under this chapter, each nonprofit corporation and public housing agency shall review the performance, appropriateness, and fee schedules of their congregate services program with eligible project residents and with the professional assessment committee. The results of such review shall be included in any application for renewal and shall be considered in the development of the application for renewal by the nonprofit corporation or public housing agency and in its evaluation by the Secretary.

(Pub. L. 95–557, title IV, §407, Oct. 31, 1978, 92 Stat. 2108.)
#### In the Matter of the Accounting of Mildred B. Donnelly et al., as Executors of Frank E. Donnelly, Deceased, Executor of Marjorie K. Carlson, Deceased.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TREANDOUS COTTON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

A. HEDGPETH, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-00385 WHA

ORDER GRANTING 

PRO BONO COUNSEL’S 

MOTION TO WITHDRAW

This order follows the May 14 hearing regarding pro bono counsel’s motion to

withdraw. Pro bono counsel, plaintiff, and defense counsel appeared. For the reasons stated at

oral argument, the motion to withdraw is hereby GRANTED. Bryan Cave LLP is hereby

relieved from this action. No further pro bono counsel will be appointed. Plaintiff will proceed

pro se. All existing deadlines remain in place, including the SEPTEMBER 28, 2015 AT 7:30 A.M.

trial date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 14, 2015. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-00385-WHA Document 127 Filed 05/14/15 Page 1 of 1
### §5613. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 5613 was editorially reclassified as section 11113 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
**Exhibit32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Omtool, Ltd. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Daniel A.Coccoluto, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,to my knowledge, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 
| /s/ Daniel  A. Coccoluto |   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|
| Daniel A.  Coccoluto     |   |   |
| Chief  Financial Officer |   |   |
| May 15,  2008       |   |   |

 

----
August 8, 2016

Mr. Curtis Bunch

Vice President of Exploration

Flanagan & Emerson Mining and Exploration LLC

543 Clay Street East

Suite 10

Monmouth, OR 97361

Re: FAA–2016–2892

Dear Mr. Bunch:

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and 

have determined that we will continue to process your petition. 

As referenced in the June 22, 2016, letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov, we 

are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently-issued regulation, 

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 107 (www.faa.gov/uas) will satisfy your request. We have determined that 

your request requires further regulatory relief (Tier 3), and we will continue working on your 

petition for exemption. 

We have found that your petition, if granted, would set a precedent. Therefore, we will 

publish a summary of your petition in the Federal Register for public comments, if we have 

not done so already.

We will advise you of the agency’s final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you 

have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov. 

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 239 (Friday, December 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73886-73887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29335]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Friday, December 19, 2014.

PLACE: Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC, 
9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance, enforcement, and examinations 
matters. In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting 
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, 
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's Web site 
at http://www.cftc.gov.

[[Page 73887]]

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-
5964.

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-29335 Filed 12-10-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
EXHIBIT 32.1



               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTIONS 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTS OF 2002


In connection with the Advanced Optics Electronics, Inc. Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Leslie
S. Robins, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

        (1)    Fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
               of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

        (2)    The information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
               fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition
               and results of  operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Advanced Optics Electronics, Inc.
and will be retained by Advanced Optics Electronics, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



/s/ LESLIE S. ROBINS
-----------------------------
LESLIE S. ROBINS
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

November 14, 2003
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-07-00042-CR

NO. 03-07-00043-CR

Joe Louis Ruiz, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

NO. 03-07-00044-CR

Jose Louis Ruiz, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 51ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOS. A-06-0707-S, A-06-0708-S & B-04-1112-S

HONORABLE THOMAS J. GOSSETT, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A jury found appellant Joe (Jose) Louis Ruiz guilty of aggravated assault with a

deadly weapon (cause number A-06-0707-S) and assault on a family member, subsequent offense
2

(cause number A-06-0708-S). See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(a)(1), (b)(2), § 22.02(a)(2)

(West Supp. 2007). The trial court assessed punishment for the aggravated assault at imprisonment

for twenty years and for the family assault at imprisonment for seven years. In addition, the court

adjudicated appellant guilty of burglary of a building, an offense to which appellant had previously

pleaded guilty and for which he had been placed on deferred adjudication supervision (cause number

B-04-1112-S). See id. § 30.02 (West 2003). The court assessed punishment for the burglary at 730

days in state jail.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeals are

frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the records demonstrating why there are no

arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State,

573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);

Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137

(Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right

to examine the appellate records and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the records and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeals are

frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
3

The judgments of conviction are affirmed.

__________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Puryear and Pemberton

Affirmed

Filed: January 9, 2008

Do Not Publish