alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 14, 2019

No. 04-19-00018-CV

THE MAYAN AT SAN MARCOS RIVER, LLC and City of Martindale, Texas,

Appellants

v.

CITY OF SAN MARCOS, Texas,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18-0958-CV-A

Honorable Jessica Crawford, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellee has filed a motion for extension of time to file its brief. The motion is 

GRANTED. Appellee’s brief is due June 24, 2019. 

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 14th day of June, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
### §624. Disclosure requirements for United States-based foreign media outlets

#### (a) Reports by outlets to Commission

Not later than 60 days after August 13, 2018, and not less frequently than every 6 months thereafter, a United States-based foreign media outlet shall submit to the Commission a report that contains the following information:

(1) The name of such outlet.

(2) A description of the relationship of such outlet to the foreign principal of such outlet, including a description of the legal structure of such relationship and any funding that such outlet receives from such principal.

#### (b) Reports by Commission to Congress

Not later than 90 days after August 13, 2018, and not less frequently than every 6 months thereafter, the Commission shall transmit to Congress a report that summarizes the contents of the reports submitted by United States-based foreign media outlets under subsection (a) during the preceding 6-month period.

#### (c) Public availability

The Commission shall make publicly available on the internet website of the Commission each report submitted by a United States-based foreign media outlet under subsection (a) not later than the earlier of—

(1) the date that is 30 days after the outlet submits the report to the Commission; or

(2) the date on which the Commission transmits to Congress under subsection (b) the report covering the 6-month period during which the report of the outlet was submitted to the Commission under subsection (a).

#### (d) Definitions

In this section:

#### (1) Foreign principal

The term "foreign principal" has the meaning given such term in section 1(b)(1) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 611(b)(1)).

#### (2) United States-based foreign media outlet

The term "United States-based foreign media outlet" means an entity that—

(A) produces or distributes video programming (as defined in section 522 of this title) that is transmitted, or intended for transmission, by a multichannel video programming distributor (as defined in such section) to consumers in the United States; and

(B) would be an agent of a foreign principal (as defined in paragraph (1)) for purposes of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.) but for section 1(d) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 611(d)).

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title VII, §722, as added Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title X, §1085, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1991.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, referred to in subsec. (d)(2)(B), is act June 8, 1938, ch. 327, 52 Stat. 631, which is classified generally to subchapter II (§611 et seq.) of chapter 11 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 611 of Title 22 and Tables.
#### Universal Vending Service Company, appellee, v. T. Segredo, appellant.

Gen. No. 28,606.

Consolidated with No. 28,578 ante. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hoa, geiiry M. Walker, Judge, presiding. *619Heard in the second division of this court for the first district.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed November 27, 1923.

Per Curiam.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF WEIDER NUTRITION INTERNATIONAL, INC. AS OF,
AND FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDING FEBRUARY 29, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-29-2000
<CASH>                                           2,708
<SECURITIES>                                     1,859
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,744
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,036
<INVENTORY>                                     52,483
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               111,923
<PP&E>                                          70,369
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,309
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 222,036
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          128,335
<BONDS>                                          3,581
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           250
<OTHER-SE>                                      89,680
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   222,036
<SALES>                                        267,792
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               267,792
<CGS>                                          167,597
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  167,597
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                88,703
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,412
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,519
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,376
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,143
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,143
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09


</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.410 How do I obtain approval to drill a well? You must obtain written approval from the District Manager before you begin drilling any well or before you sidetrack, bypass, or deepen a well. To obtain approval, you must: ( a ) Submit the information required by §§ 250.411 through 250.418;
( b ) Include the well in your approved Exploration Plan (EP), Development and Production Plan (DPP), or Development Operations Coordination Document (DOCD);
( c ) Meet the oil spill financial responsibility requirements for offshore facilities as required by 30 CFR part 553; and
( d ) Submit the following to the District Manager: ( 1 ) An original and two complete copies of Form BSEE-0123, Application for Permit to Drill (APD), and Form BSEE-0123S, Supplemental APD Information Sheet;
( 2 ) A separate public information copy of forms BSEE-0123 and BSEE-0123S that meets the requirements of § 250.186; and
( 3 ) Payment of the service fee listed in § 250.125.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001022356
<NAME> ANKER COAL GROUP, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                               6
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,801
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,340
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,950
<PP&E>                                         138,527
<DEPRECIATION>                                  47,639
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 171,678
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,016
<BONDS>                                        164,762
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           23,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (94,415)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   171,678
<SALES>                                         58,358
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                58,358
<CGS>                                           52,448
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   58,638
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,266)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,213
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,227)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (200)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,027)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,027)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Dwight Tippins, Appellant.

Motion for leave to appeal as a poor person, will be treated as a motion to dispense with printing. Motion granted. The appeal will be heard on the original papers (including the typed minutes) and on a typewritten brief. The appellant is directed to file five copies of his brief and to serve one copy. The appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged to the January 1961 Term. Motion for assignment of counsel granted. Leonard H. Kaplan, Esq., 44 Court Street, Brooklyn 1, New York, is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10(n)



                                 August 12, 2002


Mr. Richard L. Travis, Jr.
7067 Inwood Road
Dallas, Texas  75209

         Re:      Amendment to Employment Agreement

Dear Mr. Travis:

         Reference is hereby made to the Employment Agreement (the "Agreement"),
dated to be effective as of February 4, 2002, between Peerless Mfg. Co. (the
"Company") and Richard L. Travis, Jr. ("Executive") regarding Executive's
employment with the Company. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise
defined have the meanings given such terms in the Agreement.

         In consideration of Executive's service to the Company as the Company's
Chief Financial Officer and as an inducement for Executive to remain in the
employ of the Company, the Company and Executive desire to amend the Agreement
to increase the severance compensation Executive would receive if his employment
with the Company was terminated without Cause.

         The Company and Executive hereby agree that effective as of the date
hereof, Section 4.1 of the Agreement entitled "Termination by Employer" is
hereby amended by deleting the reference to "one hundred percent (100%)" therein
and inserting "one hundred fifty percent (150%)" in lieu thereof.

                                   Sincerely,

                                   PEERLESS MFG. CO.

                                   /s/ Sherrill Stone
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Sherrill Stone,
                                   Chairman of Board and Chief Executive Officer


Agreed and Acknowledged this
15th day of August 2002.

/s/ Richard L. Travis, Jr.
--------------------------
Richard L. Travis, Jr.
### §14904. Additional rate violations

(a) Rebates by Agents.—A person, or an officer, employee, or agent of that person, that—

(1) offers, grants, gives, solicits, accepts, or receives a rebate for concession, in violation of a provision of this part related to motor carrier transportation subject to jurisdiction under subchapter I of chapter 135; or

(2) by any means assists or permits another person to get transportation that is subject to jurisdiction under that subchapter at less than the rate in effect for that transportation under section 13702,

is liable to the United States for a civil penalty of $200 for the first violation and $250 for a subsequent violation.

(b) Undercharging.—

(1) Freight forwarder.—A freight forwarder providing service subject to jurisdiction under subchapter III of chapter 135, or an officer, agent, or employee of that freight forwarder, that assists a person in getting, or willingly permits a person to get, service provided under that subchapter at less than the rate in effect for that service under section 13702, is liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more than $500 for the first violation and not more than $2,000 for a subsequent violation.

(2) Others.—A person that by any means gets, or attempts to get, service provided under subchapter III of chapter 135 at less than the rate in effect for that service under section 13702, is liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more than $500 for the first violation and not more than $2,000 for a subsequent violation.

(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, §103, Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 915.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 11904 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, §102(a).

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.
] seis
UMNAK

BATHYMETRIC MAP

UNITED STATES
### §11109. Attachment of wages

(a) Wages due or accruing to a master or seaman are not subject to attachment or arrestment from any court, except for an order of a court about the payment by a master or seaman of any part of the master's or seaman's wages for the support and maintenance of the spouse or minor children of the master or seaman, or both. A payment of wages to a master or seaman is valid, notwithstanding any prior sale or assignment of wages or any attachment, encumbrance, or arrestment of the wages.

(b) An assignment or sale of wages or salvage made before the payment of wages does not bind the party making it, except allotments authorized by section 10315 of this title.

(c) This section applies to an individual employed on a fishing vessel or any fish processing vessel.

(Pub. L. 98–89, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 580; Pub. L. 98–364, title IV, §402(15), July 17, 1984, 98 Stat. 450.)

| Revised section | Source section (U.S. Code) |
| --- | --- |
| 11109 | 46:601 |

Section 11109 limits the attachment of a seaman's wages and establishes certain rules for the assignment of a seaman's wages. It also applies to fishermen on fishing vessels.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1984—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 98–364 substituted "an individual employed on a fishing vessel or any fish processing vessel" for "a fisherman on a fishing vessel".
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM COMMODORE
SEPARATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. MARCH 31, 2000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                             223
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       10
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        519
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   752
<PP&E>                                           2,104
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,252
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,788
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,831
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                            11
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,125)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,788
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     8
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      370
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (362)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (362)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (362)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)


</TABLE>
****
HPCC PARTICIPATING AGENCIES AND CONTACTS

The National Coordination Office for High Performance Computing andCommunications provides general information about the HPCC Program.
**National Coordination Office for High Performance Computing andCommunications (NCO)
Building 38A, B1N30**
No. 99-20599 1–

* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-20599 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus EDDIE GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CR-126-7

-------------------- April 13, 2000 Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Eddie Gomez argues that the district court clearly erred in including the 1996 cocaine transactions as relevant conduct to the offense of conviction. The inclusion of the 1996 transactions increased the quantity of drugs for which Gomez was held responsible. Gomez argues that the 1996 cocaine transactions were not part of the conspiracy for which he was convicted and were not part of the same common scheme or plan as the conspiracy.No. 99-20599 2– The district court’s determination on the quantity of drugs for sentencing purposes is a factual finding that this court reviews for clear error. United States v. Torres , 114 F.3d 520, 527 (5th Cir. 1997). To determine whether prior conduct qualifies as relevant conduct under § 1B1.3(a)(2), we consider the similarity, regularity, and temporal proximity of the conduct. United States v. Bethley , 973 F.2d 396, 401 (5th Cir. 1992) (relevant conduct apply to drug distributions occurring continuously during the six months before the charged conduct). There is no dispute as to the facts of this case. The cocaine trafficking engaged in during 1996 was outside of the time period which the indictment specified for the conspiracy. The 1996 transactions took place less than one year before the dates of the conspiracy. The 1996 transactions involved the same people involved in the charged conspiracy. Gomez argues that the 1996 transactions were not part of the conspiracy because the drugs moved in 1996 did not come from the same source or go to the same destination as the drugs in the charged conspiracy. This argument would be persuasive if the charged conspiracy involved regular shipments of drugs from a single source to a single destination; however, the charged conspiracy was not a structured operation. Rather, it consisted of stealing, buying, and selling marijuana and cocaine in an opportunistic manner. The district court was not clearly wrong in finding that the 1996 transactions were part of the relevant conduct of the conspiracy.
AFFIRMED.
Editorial Note on Part 1206
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1206 (formerly part 206) appear at 67 FR 19111, Apr. 18, 2002.

§ 1206.119 How do I determine royalty quantity and quality? ( a ) You must calculate royalties based on the quantity and quality of oil as measured at the point of royalty settlement that BLM or BSEE approves for onshore leases and OCS leases, respectively.
( b ) If you base the value of oil determined under this subpart on a quantity and/or quality that is different from the quantity and/or quality at the point of royalty settlement that BLM or BSEE approves, you must adjust that value for the differences in quantity and/or quality.
( c ) You may not make any deductions from the royalty volume or royalty value for actual or theoretical losses. Any actual loss that you sustain before the royalty settlement metering or measurement point is not subject to royalty if BLM or BSEE, whichever is appropriate, determines that such loss was unavoidable.
( d ) You must pay royalties on 100 percent of the volume measured at the approved point of royalty settlement. You may not claim a reduction in that measured volume for actual losses beyond the approved point of royalty settlement or for theoretical losses that you claim to have taken place either before or after the approved point of royalty settlement.