alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 41468 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JULIUS CALVIN CHRISTOPHER , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:16

- CR

- 366

- 1

Before JONES, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Julius Calvin Christopher 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). Christopher h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for

* 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 R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR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, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-41468 Document: 00514279753 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2017No. 16

- 41468

2 appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to w ithdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 16-41468 Document: 00514279753 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2017
To: File

From: Antonio Bouza

Date: July 31, 2006

Subject: EPA Meeting of April 19, 2006

On April 19, 2006, the Department of Energy (DOE) had an informal meeting with

representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). DOE is in the process of

determining whether energy conservations standards are warranted for BC/EPS. The

group representing DOE included Antonio Bouza and DOE Contractors, D&R

International and Navigant Consulting. EPA was represented by Andrew Fanara and its

consultants; ICF Consulting, the Cadmus Group and Ecos Consulting.

EPA provided the DOE with background information concerning EPA's efforts in

development of the ENERGY STAR designation for battery chargers (BC) and external

power supplies (EPS). In addition, DOE received a dataset for 190 Ac-Dc power

adaptors and 22 Ac-Ac power adaptors. This dataset was summarized in chart form by

the EPA including the test results for some battery chargers.

EERE-2006-DET-0136 COMMENT 02
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1162 When may I burn produced liquid hydrocarbons? ( a ) You must request and receive approval from the Regional Supervisor to burn any produced liquid hydrocarbons. The Regional Supervisor may allow you to burn liquid hydrocarbons if you demonstrate that transporting them to market or re-injecting them is not technically feasible or poses a significant risk of harm to offshore personnel or the environment.
( b ) If you burn liquid hydrocarbons without the required approval, or if the Regional Supervisor determines that you were negligent or could have avoided burning liquid hydrocarbons, the hydrocarbons will be considered avoidably lost or wasted. You must pay royalties on the loss or waste, according to 30 CFR part 1202. You must value any liquid hydrocarbons avoidably lost or wasted under the provisions of 30 CFR part 1206.
### subpart iv—enforcement and penalties
#### § 1218.152 Fishermen's Contingency Fund.

Upon the establishment of the Fishermen's Contingency Fund, any holder of a lease issued or maintained under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and any holder of an exploration permit or of an easement or right-of-way for the construction of a pipeline, shall pay an amount specified by the Director, ONRR, who shall assess and collect the specified amount from each holder and deposit it into the Fund. With respect to prelease exploratory drilling permits, the amount will be collected at the time of issuance of the permit.

[52 FR 5458, Feb. 23, 1987]
#### § 1.1 Official emblem.

The following emblem is established and shall be used as the official emblem of the Mine Safety and Health Administration, except where use of the Departmental Seal is required:

[![](https://img.federalregister.gov/EC22OC91.000/EC22OC91.000_large.png)](https://img.federalregister.gov/EC22OC91.000/EC22OC91.000_original_size.png)

[[39 FR 23997](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/39-FR-23997), June 28, 1974, as amended at [43 FR 12312](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/43-FR-12312), Mar. 24, 1978]
### SUBCHAPTER IV—PUBLIC HOUSING
#### The People of the State of New York v. Louis Chirco, Jr.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before August 14, 1962, with notice of argument for the September 1962 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
§ 23.8 Inspection and tests. ( a ) A thorough inspection of the telephone or signaling device will be made to determine its adequacy and permissibility. Tests may be made to check the electrical characteristics and constants of the various parts, and determine the adequacy of the insulation and other parts of features of the device.
( b ) In addition, compartments of explosion-proof design will be tested while filled and surrounded with explosive mixtures containing varying percentages of Pittsburgh natural gas[2] and air, the mixture within the compartment being ignited by a spark plug or other suitable means. For some of the tests bituminous-coal dust will be introduced into the compartment in addition to the explosive mixtures, and the effects will be noted. A sufficient number of tests will be made under the foregoing conditions to determine the ability of the compartment to retain flame without bursting. Even though the surrounding mixtures are not ignited, the compartment will not be considered as having passed the tests, if flames are discharged from any joint or opening; if excessive pressures are developed or if serious distortion of the compartment walls take place.
Footnotes -
23.8
[2] Investigation has shown that for test purposes Pittsburgh natural gas (containing a high percentage of methane) is a satisfactory substitute for pure methane.
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

JOSHUA ADAM MARSHALL, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0104 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

Nos. CR 1998-093180

 CR 2001-091927

The Honorable Jo Lynn Gentry, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Faith Cheree Klepper

Counsel for Respondent

The Stavris Law Firm, PLLC, Scottsdale

By Christopher Stavris

Counsel for Petitioner

FILED 06-25-2024
STATE v. MARSHALL

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Angela K. Paton, Judge Michael S. Catlett, and Judge James 

B. Morse Jr. delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Joshua Adam Marshall seeks review of the superior 

court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is 

petitioner’s second petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19, 278 P.3d 1276, 1280 (2012). It is 

petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by 

denying the petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz.

537, ¶ 1, 260 P.3d 1102, 1103 (App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of 

establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of 

discretion. 

¶4 We grant review and deny relief.
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.§1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


§906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of ATEL Capital Equipment Fund XI, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Paritosh K. Choksi, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of ATEL Financial Services, LLC, Managing Member of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: March 28, 2011





/s/ Paritosh K. ChoksiParitosh K. ChoksiExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer ofATEL Financial Services, LLC (Managing Member)





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 50.32 Responsibility for environmental processing.

The program staff in the HUD office responsible for processing the project application or recommending a policy action is responsible for conducting the compliance finding, EA, or EIS. The collection of data and studies as part of the information contained in the environmental review may be done by an applicant or the applicant's contractor. The HUD program staff may use any information supplied by the applicant or contractor, provided HUD independently evaluates the information, will be responsible for its accuracy, supplements the information, if necessary, to conform to the requirements of this part, and prepares the environmental finding. Assessments for projects over 200 lots/dwelling units or beds shall be sent to the Field Environmental Clearance Officer (FECO) or, in the absence of a FECO, to the Program Environmental Clearance Officer in Headquarters for review and comment.
### Geology of northwestern North Park, Colorado

By: W. J. Hail Jr.

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1188

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf) 
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-80,602-01

EX PARTE MARCUS ANTHONY SHUFF, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 10CR0506-83-1 

 IN THE 405 DISTRICT COURT FROM GALVESTON COUNTY TH

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of murder and

sentenced to life imprisonment. The First Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Shuff v. State,

No. 01-12-00034-CR (Tex. App.–Houston [1 ] May 2, 2013). st

Applicant contends that he was denied his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary

review because his counsel was not timely notified of the appellate court’s decision and therefore

did not timely notify Applicant of the appellate court’s decision.

Appellate counsel filed an affidavit with the trial court. Based on that affidavit, the trial court
2

has entered findings of fact and conclusions of law that Applicant was denied his right to file a pro

se petition for discretionary review. The State and the trial court recommend that relief be granted. 

Ex parte Riley, 193 S.W.3d 900 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).

We find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition

for discretionary review of the judgment of the First Court of Appeals in Cause No. 01-12-00034-CR

that affirmed his conviction in Cause No. 10CR0506-83-1 from the 405 District Court of Galveston th

County. Applicant shall file his petition for discretionary review with this Court within 30 days of

the date on which this Court’s mandate issues.

Delivered: December 18, 2013

Do not publish
### SUBCHAPTER I—EQUIPMENT TRUSTS AND SECURITY INTERESTS
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 10, 2020.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 23, 2020, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 681 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2021-30, CP2021-31.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2020-27071 Filed 12-9-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsSubsonic aerodynamic characteristics of a proposed advanced manned launch system orbiter configurationThe Advanced Manned Launch System is a proposed near-term technology, two-stage, fully reusable launch system that consists of an unmanned glide-back booster and a manned orbiter. An orbiter model that featured a large fuselage and an aft delta wing with tip fins was tested in the Langley 7- by 10-Foot High-Speed Tunnel. A crew cabin, large payload fairing, and crew access tunnel were mounted on the upper body. The results of the investigation indicated that the configuration was longitudinally stable to an angle of attack of about 6 deg about a center-of-gravity position of 0.7 body length. The model had an untrimmed lift-drag ratio of 6.6, but could not be trimmed at positive lift. The orbiter model was also directionally unstable. The payload fairing was responsible for about half the instability. The tip-fin controllers, which are designed as active controls to produce artificial directional stability, were effective in producing yawing moment, but sizable adverse rolling moment occurred at angles of attack above 6 deg. Differential deflection of the elevon surfaces was effective in producing rolling moment with only small values of adverse yawing moment.Document ID19930013369Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsWare, George M.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Fox, Charles H., Jr.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateFebruary 1, 1993Publication InformationPublisher: WashingtonSubject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberL-17182NASA-TM-4439NAS 1.15:4439Accession Number93N22558Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 506-40-61-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930013369.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
### §1426. Repealed. Aug. 2, 1954, ch. 649, title II, §205, 68 Stat. 622

Section, acts Apr. 23, 1949, ch. 89, §2(b), 63 Stat. 58; June 30, 1953, ch. 170, §25(b), 67 Stat. 128, related to purchase of insured mortgage loans by the Federal National Mortgage Association, with respect to property in Guam. Section was not enacted as part of the Organic Act of Guam which comprises this chapter.
Exhibit 11.1
                    TURBODYNE TECHNOLOGIES INC AND SUBSIDIARIES
                   SCHEDULE OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

LOSS PER SHARE                                                    Three Months Ended                      Nine Months Ended
                                                                     September 30,                           September 30,
                                                     1998                1997                1998                1997
                                               ----------------   -----------------   -----------------    ----------------
<S>                                            <C>                 <C>                <C>                  <C>             
Net loss                                       $    (4,233,000)    $    (2,334,000)   $    (12,002,000)    $    (7,362,000)

Basic EPS - Weighted Average Shares
        Outstanding                                 41,204,000          29,437,000          38,446,000          25,323,000
Less: Shares in Escrow                              (4,150,000)         (4,150,000)         (4,150,000)         (4,150,000)
Basic EPS - Weighted Average Shares
        Outstanding Adjusted                        37,054,000          25,287,000          34,296,000          21,173,000
                                                  ==============      =============       ===============     ==============
                                                  ==============      =============       ===============     ==============
Basic Loss per Share                           $         (0.11)    $         (0.09)   $          (0.35)    $         (0.35)
                                                  ==============      =============       ===============     ==============

Basic EPS - Weighted Average Shares
        Outstanding Adjusted                        37,054,000          25,287,000          34,296,000          21,173,000
                                                  ==============      =============       ===============     ==============

Effect of Diluted Securities:
        Warrants and Stock Options (1)                       -                   -                   -                   -
Diluted EPS - Weighted Average Shares
        Outstanding                                 37,054,000          25,287,000          34,296,000          21,173,000
                                                  ==============      =============       ===============     ==============

Diluted Loss per Share                         $         (0.11)     $        (0.09)    $         (0.35)    $         (0.35)
</TABLE>


(1)   The Company's outstanding stock options and  warrants have an antidilutive
      effect on net loss per share.  As a result such amounts have been excluded
      from the computations of diluted loss per share.


PAGE 22
### SUBCHAPTER V—JUDICIAL BRANCH