alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 1944

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1944 appear at 80 FR 9885, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1944.409 Executive Order 12372.

The self-help program is subject to the provision of Executive Order 12372 which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. These requirements are set forth in U. S. Department of Agriculture regulations 7 CFR 3015, subpart V and RD Instruction 1970-I, ‘Intergovernmental Review,’ available in any Agency office or on the Agency's Web site, new applicants for the self-help program must submit their Statement of Activities to the State single point of contact prior to submitting their preapplication to Agency. The name of the point of contact is available from the State Office.

[55 FR 41833, Oct. 16, 1990, as amended at 61 FR 39851, July 31, 1996; 76 FR 80730, Dec. 27, 2011]
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed December 16, 2014.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-14-00775-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.T.H., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 309th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2012-70308

MEMORA NDUM OPINION

Appellant, Alecia Lynn Howe, filed a notice of appeal on September 25, 

2014, to appeal an order signed August 27, 2014. According to information 

provided to this court, it appears that appellant is attempting to appeal from an 

interlocutory order granting temporary relief. This court is unable to determine our 

jurisdiction, however, because no clerk’s record has been filed. 

The record in this appeal was due October 27, 2014. On November 19, 2014, 

the Harris County District Clerk’s office notified this court that appellant has not 

paid for preparation of the record. The same day, the official court reporter for the 

309th District Court notified this court that appellant has not made arrangements to 
2

pay for preparation of the reporter’s record. 

In addition, our records show that appellant has not paid the $195.00 

appellate filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in civil cases 

unless indigent); see also Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil Cases in the 

Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial Panel on 

Multidistrict Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 13-9127 (Tex. Aug. 16, 2013) (listing 

fees in court of appeals); Tex. Gov’t Code ' 51.207 (same). On October 8, 2014, 

this court notified appellant that the filing fee was past due and the appeal was 

subject to dismissal unless appellant paid the fee by October 20, 2014. No response 

was filed.

On November 20, 2014, notification was transmitted to all parties of the 

court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless, within 

fifteen days, appellant paid or made arrangements to pay for the record and 

provided this court with proof of payment. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Appellant 

has not provided this court with proof of payment for the record or filed any other 

response to the court’s notice.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Donovan, and Wise.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 17, 2018

No. 04-17-00338-CV

Travis CROW, Britt A. Crow, Laurian Crow Edison, and Karen A. Kraft,

Appellants

v.

Heddie Knappick LOOKADOO, Lisa Knappick Lucas, Mary Brown, Margaret Brown Nugent, 

Charles Brown, Joseph Gallagher, Josephine Brown Noll, Pamela Gallagher Palmer, and Irene 

B. Zoeller,

Appellees

From the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-10-00188-CVL

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellants have filed a Response to Abatement, in which appellants assert the parties 

jointly request that we extend the abatement of this appeal for thirty days. The request is 

GRANTED. It is ORDERED that appellants file, on or before January 31, 2019, a response in 

this court addressing whether the abatement should be lifted and the appeal reinstated on the 

docket of this court. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1, 43.2; see Caballero v. Heart of Texas Pizza, L.L.C., 70 

S.W.3d 180, 180 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2001, no pet.).

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

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

court on this 17th day of December, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
### MANDATE



## Court of Appeals

**First District of Texas**

NO. 01

- 14

- 0811

- CR

EX PARTE JESSICA NIC OLE MAUCK , Appellant

Appeal from the 174th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 1342193

- A).

TO THE 174TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before this Court, on the 27th day of August 2015, the case upon appeal to revise

or to reverse your judgment was determined. This Court made its order in these words:

This case is an appeal from the final order signed by the trial court on September 4, 2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s

order contains no reversi ble error. Accordingly, the Court

affirms the trial court’s order.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below

for observance.

Judgment rendered August 27, 2015.

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Bland, and Brown. Opinion delivered by Jus tice Jennings.WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court

in this behalf and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

November 6, 2015

Date CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK OF THE COURT
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As      Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),                as                applicable, 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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                Thomas J. Ward                                                                       |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Thomas                J. Ward                                                                           |
| Chief                Executive Officer and Vice Chairman of the Board                                   |
| (principal executive officer and acting principal financial officer) |

*This      certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that      section, nor shall it be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing      under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except      to the extent the Company specifically incorporates it by      reference.*

----
Editorial Note on Part 1951
Editorial Notes: 1. Some of the exhibits referenced in this part 1951 are not published in the Code of Federal Regulations. Exhibits are available in any Rural Development office. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 1951 appear at 80 FR 9890-9894, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1951.851 Introduction. ( a ) This subpart contains regulations for servicing or liquidating loans or other assistance made by the Rural Business-Cooperative Service or its successor agency under the IRP and the RMAP. All debt settlement cases under this subpart will be settled in accordance with the debt settlement provisions set forth in 7 CFR part 1956, subpart C. The provisions of this subpart supersede conflicting provisions of any other subpart.
( b ) This subpart also contains regulations for servicing the existing Rural Development Loan Fund (RDLF) loans previously approved and administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under 45 CFR part 1076. This action is needed to implement the provisions of Section 1323 of the Food Security Act of 1985, Pub. L. 99-198, which provides for the transfer of the loan servicing authority for those loans from the HHS to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
( c ) These regulations do not negate contractual arrangements that were previously made by the HHS, Office of Community Services (OCS), or the intermediaries operating relending programs that have already been entered into with ultimate recipients under previous regulations.
( d ) The loan program is administered by the Rural Development National Office. The Director, Business and Industry Division, is the point of contact for servicing activities unless otherwise delegated by the Administrator.
[53 FR 30656, Aug. 15, 1988, as amended at 79 FR 31847, June 3, 2014; 80 FR 13201, Mar. 13, 2015]
§ 1734.8 Audit requirements. A recipient of financial assistance shall provide RUS with an audit for each year, beginning with the year in which a portion of the financial assistance is expended, in accordance with the following: ( a ) If the awardee is a for-profit entity, an electric or telecommunications cooperative, or any other entity not covered by the definition of “non-Federal entity” in 2 CFR 200.1, the awardee shall provide an independent audit report in accordance with 7 CFR part 1773 and the grant agreement.
( b ) If the awardee is a non-Federal entity, as defined in 2 CFR 200.1, the awardee shall provide an audit in accordance with subpart F of 2 CFR part 200.
( c ) Grant awardees shall comply with 2 CFR part 200, and rules on the disposition of grant assets in part 200 shall be applied regardless of the type of legal organization of the grantee.
[82 FR 55925, Nov. 27, 2017, as amended at 88 FR 7561, Feb. 6, 2023]
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Ronornble re.L. am1teA 

County Aud%tOr 

JohnaanCoady: 

Cleburne, zexbe 

A 

tns OUT opinion upon the 

era’ court of Johnsen Count 

0rfiOer OP a pmbati0n off: 

Three Rundred and 

FecIoral Conaus, 

5139, Vf3~OXl’8 

cl%+atfon of n c 

tioa or one 

tlon of Thirty !Phoumnd, 

according to the 1940 

V1SiOnS of Article 

rOYid for the 

08 

t appolnttrd by the oountp 

ed by the oounty judge 

of the county; therefore, 

omd, said ouunty is not 

ser. (Art. 5142b, 884. 3, Vernon'8 

hiV180d civil 8totUte8, a8 Unelrded bp 

heture, prov1lder, la partr 
:- 

,-. 

.- 

, c - 

c . 

Eon6mble 8.L. Bheltoa, Pnge 2 

ofCfcer meq b8 appoInted by the Conxntsri~rr~ 

Court vhon La their oplnlon 8uoh OfficeF 18 needed, who aball moeive a corqpensatlcn not to excmod 

one Rundred and 2uentpSlVO Dollnm (9l25) per 

month.... 

Tadtw98'0r paid juvenile offlaero ind their 

aasist8ntr shall be fixed by the Cmal8sionor8 

Court, not to exteed the 8ums herein mentioned, and 

any bill for the expenses not exceed- tho DUDS 

herein provided for, 8hdl be oertlfied by the 

hIIit~ &&t&e LLS bolq ll8Ce88~ in the perfonaance Of 

the duti.8 Of 8 jUW3niltl OrfiCIIr. The hZUli88iOaO~8 

Court of' the county shrzll provide the aeceesosp fund8 

for the payment of 8alnrier nnd expenee8 of the juvex~- 

.ile Offb33r8 provided fop In this Aat. !Phe appointment of'said juvenile off'iaers shall be filed ln the 

office OS the Clerk OS the County Court. Siwenile 

Off180r8 8hd1 tit&e Osth SO ~9Fr;POI'm thQir duties 8.d 

file cluch-oath ti the office of the County Clerk. 

A8 n baai ?OP mCkOni.ng the pOpUl.8tlOn 9,i my OoUnty 

the preoedtng Fedcml Connus shall be used.,.." 

Under the above Quoted portl~nn of Artiole 5142, the 

aoml88lam3r8~~court of Johnsan County, 2exa8, may appoint on0 

juvenile oiflcer Sor 88id uounty, lf, in the opinio& OS mid 

County,, euch offiaer LB needed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                               5
<CIK>                                   0000792989
<MULTIPLIER>                            1
<CURRENCY>                              U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                            DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                  1455407
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        0
<PP&E>                                  12915590
<DEPRECIATION>                          4632472
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          9811469
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   0
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                              0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            2008655
<SALES>                                 2620682
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        2667128
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         1092185
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     1092185
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                            1092185
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           0
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0
        

</TABLE>
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-13-0000086 26-SEP-2014 11:47 AM
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ruths Hospitality Group, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter
ended June 27, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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: August 4, 2010



By

/s/ MICHAEL P. ODONNELLMichael P. ODonnellPresident and Chief Executive Officer ofRuths Hospitality Group, Inc.
§ 1738.153 Terms and conditions. Terms and conditions of the loan and loan/grant combinations are set forth in a mortgage, note, and loan contract. Samples of the mortgage, note, and loan contract can be found on the Agency's website. ( a ) Unless requested to be shorter by the Applicant, loans must be repaid with interest within a period that, rounded to the nearest whole year, is equal to the expected composite economic life of the assets to be financed, as determined by the Agency based upon acceptable depreciation rates. Expected composite economic life means the weighted average economic life of all classes of facilities necessary to complete construction of the broadband facilities plus 3 years.
( b ) Principal payments for each advance are amortized over the remaining term of the loan and are due monthly. Principal payments will be deferred until 3 years after the date of the first advance of loan funds. Interest begins accruing when the first advance of loan funding is made and interest payments are due monthly, with no deferral period.
( c ) Awardees are required to carry fidelity bond coverage. Generally, this amount will be 15 percent of the loan or loan/grant combination Award amount, not to exceed $5 million. The Agency may reduce the percentage required if it determines that the amount is not commensurate with the risk involved.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1955

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1955 appear at 80 FR 9895, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1955.127 Selection and use of contractors to dispose of inventory property.

Sections 1955.128 through 1955.131 prescribe procedures for contracting for services to facilitate disposal of inventory property. RD Instruction 2024-A (available in any Rural Development office) is applicable for procurement of nonpersonal services.

[53 FR 27836, July 25, 1988]
Dismissed and Opinion Filed October 28, 2014 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00842-CV ANGELA ANDERSON, Appellant V. ARIEL FINANCIAL SERVICES, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-06-12567-C



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Just ice Lang-Miers, and Justice Brown Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The clerk’s record in this case is overdue. By letter dated August 11, 2014, we informed appellant that the Dallas County District Clerk had notified th e Court that the clerk’s record had not been filed because appellant had not paid fo r or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. We directed appellant to file written verification that she had paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record or that she had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that if she did not file the required documentation within ten days, we might dismiss the appeal wit hout further notice. To date, the clerk’s record has not been filed, appellant ha s not provided the requ ired documentation, nor has she otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of the clerk’s record.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(b).

140842F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
ANGELA ANDERSON, Appellant
No. 05-14-00842-CV V. ARIEL FINANCIAL SERVICES, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-06-12567-C. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Brown participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee ARIEL FINANCIAL SERV ICES recover its costs of this appeal from appellant ANGELA ANDERSON.
Judgment entered October 28, 2014.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PENSACOLA DIVISION 

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS 

EARPLUG PRODUCTS 

 Case No. 3:19md2885 

LIABILITY LITIGATION 

This Document Relates to All Cases Judge M. Casey Rodgers 

Magistrate Judge Hope T. Cannon 

ORDER 

This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion and Stipulation 

Regarding Release of Materials Relating to Hamery and Dancer’s Depositions. See

ECF No. 3649. Based on the stipulation, the Court finds there are no impediments 

to or limitations on the release of these materials to the parties, beyond application 

of the Protective Order in this MDL, see ECF No. 442. Accordingly: 

1. The Joint Motion and Stipulation Regarding Release of Materials

Relating to Hamery and Dancer’s Depositions, ECF No. 3649, is

GRANTED.

2. As requested, the Court will transmit electronic copies of the materials

it received from the French authorities relating to Hamery and Dancer’s

depositions to the attorneys identified in the joint motion. Those

attorneys may provide the materials to counsel of record and the parties

to the MDL, including by uploading them to MDL Centrality.

SO ORDERED, on this 27th day of January, 2023. 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3650 Filed 01/27/23 Page 1 of 1
(April 7, 1980)

#### Eugene H. Bailey et al., Petitioners, v Allen Smith et al., Constituting the Riverhead Town Board, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to review a determination of the respondent town board, dated June 19, 1979, which, after a public hearing, granted respondent Riverhead Airpark, Inc., a special use permit for a commercial airport, and to enjoin the town board and the respondent building inspectors from issuing a building permit, certificate of occupancy or other approval giving effect to the said special permit. The proceeding was transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated December 5, 1979. Proceeding remitted *sua sponte*to Special Term for determination of all questions raised. No costs or disbursements are awarded. Although CPLR 7804 (subd [g]) provides that where the substantiality of the evidence is in issue proceedings to review administrative determinations must be transferred to this court, the requirement does not apply to zoning determinations. Subdivision 7 of section 267 of the Town Law provides that "The court at special term shall itself dispose of the cause of the merits, determining all questions which may be presented for determination” (see, also, General City Law, § 82, subd 1, par [c]). Therefore, where a zoning decision is in issue, nisi prius, and not this court, has original jurisdiction. Here the decision to grant a special use permit for a commercial airport and the determination that no environmental impact statement was required were made by the town board as mandated by the Riverhead Zoning Ordinance. *574In deciding such issues the town board was acting in its plenary administrative capacity (see *Matter of Rothstein v County Operating Corp.,*6 NY2d 728; *Matter of Lemir Realty Corp. v Larkin,*11 NY2d 20, 24). Since there was no statutory basis for the instant transfer, we are constrained to retransfer the matter to the court in which original jurisdiction is reposed. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
#### § 1788.12 Contractors' bonds.

Electric borrowers shall require contractors to obtain contractors' bonds when required by part 1726, Electric System Construction Policies and Procedures, of this chapter. Surety companies providing contractors' bonds shall be listed as acceptable sureties in the U.S. Department of Treasury Circular No. 570. The circular is maintained through periodic publication in the Federal Register and is available on the Internet under ftp://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/tel/sureties.txt, and on the Department of the Treasury's computer bulletin board at 202-874-6817.
#### HAYDEL, Respondent, v. GOULD, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 27, 1906.)

Action by Abner J. Haydel against Howard Gould.

No opinion. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.