alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 200.2016 Witnesses. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, testimony at the hearing will be given orally by witnesses under oath or affirmation.
( b ) At the discretion of the ALJ, testimony (other than expert testimony) may be admitted in the form of a written statement. The ALJ may, at his or her discretion, admit prior sworn testimony of experts which has been subject to adverse examination, such as a deposition or trial testimony. Any such written statement must be provided to all other parties along with the last known address of such witnesses, in a manner that allows sufficient time for other parties to subpoena such witness for cross-examination at the hearing. Prior written statements of witnesses proposed to testify at the hearing will be exchanged as provided in § 200.2008.
( c ) The ALJ will exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to: ( 1 ) Make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth;
( 2 ) Avoid repetition or needless consumption of time; and
( 3 ) Protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
( d ) The ALJ will permit the parties to conduct such cross-examination of witnesses as may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts.
( e ) The ALJ may order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. This does not authorize exclusion of— ( 1 ) A party who is an individual;
( 2 ) In the case of a party that is not an individual, an officer or employee of the party appearing for the entity pro se or designated as the party's representative; or
( 3 ) An individual whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of its case, including an individual engaged in assisting the attorney for the Inspector General (IG).
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Meyer Kaufman, Deceased.

Motion to dismiss appeal from order, Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County, entered March 31, 1978, denying a motion by objectant-appellant pursuant to CPLR 5019 (subd [a]), on the ground that the order denied reargument, denied without costs and without prejudice to renewal upon the argument of the appeal. Cross motion to dismiss as untimely taken the appeal from the same order denied, without costs. Movant, in quoting from *Johnson v Anderson*(15 NY2d 925), implies that appellant procured entry of the order and that, therefore, his time to appeal runs from that date. The nettlesome problems created by the exception in former CPLR 5513 (subd [a]) for situations where appellant had procured entry of the order (see, e.g., *Matter of Stuart & Stuart*v *New York State Liq. Auth.,*23 NY2d 493, 495-496) were long ago settled by the amendment to that subdivision by the Laws of 1970 (ch 108, § 1, eff Sept. 1, 1970). As a result, the time to appeal is no longer measured from the mere entry but from the date of service by or upon the appellant of a copy of the order with notice of entry. (See Sixteenth Annual Report of NY Judicial Conference, 1975, pp 27-28; 7 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 5513.03.) In the case at bar, the earliest service of a copy of the order with notice of entry was made by appellant simultaneously with his service of the notice of appeal therefrom. Accordingly, the appeal was timely taken. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Birns, Silverman, Fein and Sandler, JJ.
Inventory Expert Service 

A division of the American Chemical Society Phone: 800-631-1884, 614-447-3870 

Fax:614-447-3747 

E-mail: answers@cas.org 

Web: www.cas.org/products/clientl 

INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT 

Please print the above CA lnde& Name on the appropriate page of your PMN, 

D 

CAS 

lf this bo& is ~hacked, CAS has made correction(s) marked in red to 

your IES order, Please make the same cor:reotion ( s) to your P!•ll>l before 

submitting it to the EPA, 

ATTACHMENT THREE: PMN Substance Two (CONFIDENTIAL) 

2540 Olentangy River Road P.O.ll<>x 334J Co(umbus, Ohio 43210·0334 USA
Exhibit 21

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF HICKORY TECH CORPORATION**

 
| Subsidiaries                                       | Jurisdiction of  Incorporation |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| Mankato Citizens Telephone Company                 | Minnesota                      |
| Mid-Communications, Inc.                           | Minnesota                      |
| Cable Network, Inc.                                | Minnesota                      |
| Heartland Telecommunications Company of Iowa, Inc. | Minnesota                      |
| Amana Colonies Telephone Company                   | Minnesota                      |
| Crystal Communications, Inc.                       | Minnesota                      |
| Minnesota Southern Wireless Company                | Minnesota                      |
| National Independent Billing, Inc.                 | Minnesota                      |
| Collins Communications Systems Co.                 | Minnesota                      |
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.4


                          CALEDONIA MINING CORPORATION

                     MINERAL PROPERTIES (THOUSANDS OF $CDN)

The following is a summary of the Corporation's mineral properties and the
capitalized costs as at the 31st December 2002:

<TABLE>
<S>                                                <C>              <C>
CANADA:
         Nunavut                                                    $   750

AFRICA:
         SOUTH AFRICA                               3,551
         ZAMBIA                                    10,578
                                                   ------
                                                                     14,129
                                                                    -------
TOTAL MINERAL PROPERTIES                                            $14,879
                                                                    -------
</TABLE>


NOTE: The cost of acquisition of mineral properties and all related exploration
and development expenditures, less recoveries, are capitalized and carried as an
asset to be amortized against income if the property is brought into commercial
production or charged to income if the property is, or is to be, abandoned or
disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 DORIAN E. RAMIREZ

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

September 14, 2015

Hon. Blake A. Hawthorne

Supreme Court of Texas

201 W. 14th Street, Room 104

Austin TX 78701

Re: Cause No. 13-13-00415-CV

Tr.Ct.No. D-1-GN-12-003937

Style: TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY v. TEXAS FARM 

BUREAU, FRANK VOLLEMAN, FRANK DESTEFANO, DAVID AND MARY 

BALLEW, RON AND SHERIE BURNETTE, SAM JONES, THEODORE AND 

MARY KALLUS, GLEN MARECEK, JOHN GAULDING, AND CHARLES AND 

KATHERINE HARLESS

Dear Mr. Hawthorne:

Pursuant to your office’s request, enclosed herewith please find the documents 

indicated on the attached docket sheet which was filed in the above referenced cause. 

The record is being sent electronically.

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER:ch

cc: Hon. Charles Walker Bailey

Hon. Priscilla M. Hubenak (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Hon. Dolores A. Hibbs (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Hon. Kristofer S. Monson

Hon. Douglas G. Caroom (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Hon. Cynthia Woelk (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
2004 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-13-2004 

# S outhco I nc v

. K a nebr id ge C orp P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 02-1243

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2004 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. F or mor e infor m at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" S outhc o I nc v

. K a nebr id g e C or p " (2004). 2004 D e cisio n s . P ape r 21. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004/21UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE TH IRD CIR CU IT No. 02-1243
SO UT HC O, I NC ., Appellant
v. KANE BRIDGE CO RP.

_________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE UNI TED STATES DIST RICT COURT FO R T HE EA STE RN DIST RIC T O F PE NN SY LV AN IA District Cou rt Judge: H onorab le Norm a L. Sha piro

(D.C. No. 99-cv- 4337)

____________________ Argued: December 3, 2002 Reargued En Banc: October 8, 2003 Befor e: SCIRI CA, Chi ef Judge , SLOVI TER, NYGAARD, ALITO, ROTH, McKEE, RENDELL, BARRY, AMBRO, FUENTES, SMITH, CHERTOFF, andBECKER, Circuit Judges (Opinion Fi led: December 3, 2004)
ORDER AMENDING OPINION The concurring opinion in the above case is hereby amended as follows:On the firs t line, del ete “Part II ” and repl ace it with “Part s I and II ”. : BY THE COURT:
/s/ Edw ard R. B ecker Circuit Judge DAT ED: December 13, 2004
# Solo Replacement Leg Set

1 Remove the plastic sheet from the leg. 2 Detach the antenna by carefully pulling the cable. 3 Use a #2 Phillips screwdriver to remove the two screws and detach the old leg. (For legs without an antenna, remove the two screws and replace the leg only.)

1 Thread the antenna cable through the notch in the new leg. 2 Secure the leg using the two screws. 

### 1 2

3



## 2 1

### 4 3 2 

## 1

2 Remove the backing and attach the velcro and antenna to the inside of the leg, placing the tip of the antenna 5 mm from the edge of the rubber foot. 1 Attach only the yellow-backed velcro strip to the velcro on the antenna.

3 Fold the ends of a new plastic sheet at right angles. 4 Remove the adhesive backing and stick the plastic sheet to the leg so it secures the antenna in place. Replacing the Right-Rear Leg Solo’s right-rear leg (arm #04) contains the compass module. To replace the right-rear leg, purchase a Solo Replacement Leg with Compass from store.3dr. com or an authorized retailer. For more information, visit 3dr.com/solo/info

3D Robotics 1608 4th St, Suite 140 Berkeley, CA 94710 Tel. (858) 225-1414 ©3D Robotics 2015 DCT0082 SLKAL01-01 Support online: 3dr.com/support email: support@3dr.com call: +1 (858) 225-1414 (direct) +1 (855) 822-2898 (toll free)

Support line hours: Mon-Fri 8 am to 5 pm PST Sat 9 am to 3 pm PST

## Jeu de pieds de rechange pour Solo

1 Enlevez la feuille de plastique. 2 Détachez l’antenne en tirant délicatement sur le câble. 3 Utilisez un tournevis cruciforme n° 2 pour enlever les deux vis et enlever le pied. (Pour les pieds sans antenne, retirez seulement les deux vis et remplacez le pied.)

1 Enfilez le câble d’antenne dans l’encoche du nouveau pied. 2 Fixez le pied en utilisant les deux vis.



## 2 1 1 2

31 Fixez seulement la bande de velcro avec l’autocollant jaune au velcro de l’antenne.

2 Enlevez l’autocollant, fixez le velcro et l’antenne à l’intérieur du pied en plaçant l’extrémité de l’antenne à 5 mm de l’embout en caoutchouc. 

## 1

4 3 2

3 Pliez à angle droit les extrémités d’une nouvelle feuille de plastique. 4 Enlevez le support adhésif et collez la feuille de plastique au pied pour fixer l’antenne. Remplacement du pied arrière droit Le module de boussole se situe dans le pied arrière droit de Solo (bras n° 04). Pour remplacer le pied arrière droit, achetez un pied de rechange avec boussole pour Solo sur le store.3dr.com ou auprès d’un détaillant agréé. Pour plus de renseignements, visitez 3dr.com/solo/info

3D Robotics 1608 4th St, Suite 140 Berkeley, CA 94710 Tel. (858) 225-1414 ©3D Robotics 2015 DCT0082 Soutien en ligne: 3dr.com/support courriel: support@3dr.com téléphone: +1 (858) 225-1414 (direct) +1 (855) 982-2898 ( gratuit depuis tles Etats-Unis et le Canada)
Horaires du service à la clientèle: lundi au vendredi 8 h-17 h HNP samedi 9 h-15 h HNP SLKAL01-01
#### § 77.1402 Rated capacity.

Hoists and elevators shall have rated capacities consistent with the loads handled.

(Sec. 101, Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, Pub. L. 91-173 as amended by Pub. L. 95-164, 91 Stat. 1291 (30 U.S.C. 811))

[48 FR 53241, Nov. 25, 1983]
#### Erie County Board of Social Welfare, Respondent, v. Stuart Johnson, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. (Appeal from order of Erie Children’s Court adjudging defendant to be the father of the infant child of complainant and directing him to contribute to its support.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2012-0890 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2011-SW-019-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
§ 736.23 Federal program effect on State law or regulations. ( a ) Whenever a Federal program is promulgated or revised for a State, any statutes or regulations of the State regulating coal exploration or surface coal mining and reclamation operations subject to the Act shall be preempted and superseded by the Federal program insofar as they are inconsistent with the requirements of the Act and the Federal program. In promulgating or revising a Federal program for a State, the Director shall set forth in the Federal Register any State statute or regulation which is preempted and superseded by the Federal program.
( b ) The provision of any State statute or regulation which provides for more stringent land use and environmental control and regulation of coal exploration or surface coal mining and reclamation operations than do the provisions of the Act or any regulation issued under the Act shall not be preempted and superseded by the Director and shall be incorporated into the Federal program for the State.
[44 FR 15329, Mar. 13, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 26367, June 17, 1982]
### §302903. Grants to National Trust

(a) Secretary of the Interior.—The Secretary may administer grants to the National Trust consistent with the purposes of its charter and this division.

(b) Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.—The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may make grants to the National Trust, on terms and conditions and in amounts (not exceeding $90,000 with respect to any one structure) as the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development considers appropriate, to cover the costs incurred by the National Trust in renovating or restoring structures that the National Trust considers to be of historic or architectural value and that the National Trust has accepted and will maintain (after the renovation or restoration) for historic purposes.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3203.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 302903(a) | 16 U.S.C. 470a(e)(2). | Pub. L. 89–665, title I, §101(e)(2), formerly §101(d)(2), Oct. 15, 1966, 80 Stat. 915; Pub. L. 91–383, §11, as added Pub. L. 94–458, §2, Oct. 7, 1976, 90 Stat. 1942; Pub. L. 93–54, §1(d), July 1, 1973, 87 Stat. 139; Pub. L. 96–205, title VI, §608(a)(1), (2), Mar. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 92; Pub. L. 96–515, title II, §201(a), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2992; redesignated as §101(e)(2), Pub. L. 102–575, title XL, §4006(a)(1), Oct. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 4755; Pub. L. 106–208, §5(a)(2), May 26, 2002, 114 Stat. 318. |
| 302903(b) | 16 U.S.C. 470b–1. | Pub. L. 89–754, title VI, §603, Nov. 3, 1980, 80 Stat. 1278. |

Section

In subsection (a), the words "chartered by sections 468 to 468d of this title" are omitted as unnecessary.

In subsection (b), the text of 16 U.S.C. 470b–1(b) is omitted as unnecessary.
463.0000000000
0.0000000000
0.0000000000
-463.0000000000
-5646.6476986492
1382256.6519538916
### SUBCHAPTER I—ANNUAL AND SICK LEAVE
### §5111. Revocation and restoration of authority to classify positions

(a) When the Office of Personnel Management finds that an agency is not placing positions in classes and grades in conformance with or consistently with published standards, it may revoke or suspend the authority granted to the agency by section 5107 of this title and require that prior approval of the Office be secured before an action placing a position in a class and grade becomes effective for payroll and other personnel purposes. The Office may limit the revocation or suspension to—

(1) the departmental or field service, or any part thereof;

(2) a geographic area;

(3) an organization unit or group of organization units;

(4) certain types of classification actions;

(5) classes in particular occupational groups or grades; or

(6) classes for which standards have not been published.

(b) After revocation or suspension, the Office may restore the authority to the extent that it is satisfied that later actions placing positions in classes and grades will be in conformance with or consistent with published standards.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 455; Pub. L. 95–454, title IX, §906(a)(2), (3), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1224.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 1104. | Oct. 28, 1949, ch. 782, §504, 63 Stat. 959. |

Statutes at Large

In subsection (a), the words "in whole or in part" are omitted as unnecessary in view of the specific authority to limit the revocation or suspension. The words "The Commission may limit the revocation or suspension to" are substituted for "Such revocations or suspensions may be limited, in the discretion of the Commission, to" to eliminate redundancy.

In subsection (b), the words "After revocation or suspension" are substituted for "After all or part of the authority of the department has been revoked or suspended". The words "may restore" are substituted for "may at any time restore" to eliminate redundancy.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1978—Subsecs. (a), (b). Pub. L. 95–454 substituted "Office of Personnel Management" and "Office" for "Civil Service Commission" and "Commission", respectively, wherever appearing.

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

#### Effective Date of 1978 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 95–454 effective 90 days after Oct. 13, 1978, see section 907 of Pub. L. 95–454, set out as a note under section 1101 of this title.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 4, 2022

No. 04-22-00184-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.R.R., ET AL., CHILDREN

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020PA01005

Honorable Kimberly Burley, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is a parental termination case, and appellants, C.R. and M.R., filed notices of appeal 

challenging an Associate Judge’s Report and Order terminating their parental rights to their three 

children. Because the notices of appeal were untimely filed, but filed within the fifteen-day 

grace period provided by Rule 26.2, we ordered appellants to file responses by May 2, 2022 with 

reasonable explanations for failing to file their notices of appeal in a timely manner.

On April 26, 2022, C.R. filed a motion for extension of time to file her notice of appeal.

In the motion, counsel for C.R. acknowledges her notice of appeal was untimely filed, and she 

explains she did not receive notice of the ruling until March 22, 2022, which was after the 

deadline for filing the notice of appeal. On April 29, 2022, M.R. filed a response, also indicating 

counsel did not receive notice of the ruling until March 22, 2022.

“A reasonable explanation is ‘any plausible statement of circumstances indicating that 

failure to file within the [specified] period was not deliberate or intentional, but was the result of 

inadvertence, mistake or mischance.’” Hone v. Hanafin, 104 S.W.3d 884, 886 (Tex. 2003) (per 

curiam). After construing C.R.’s motion as a response and reviewing M.R.’s response, we 

conclude appellants have provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in their filings.

Accordingly, we conclude we have jurisdiction over this matter and reinstate the appellate 

deadlines. At this time, the clerk’s record has been filed, and we order the court reporter to file 

the reporter’s record by May 16, 2022.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of May, 2022.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court