alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-64,101-08

EX PARTE RODGY LEE NESBY, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 9322G IN THE 33 DISTRICT COURT RD

FROM BURNET COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

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 aggravated sexual

assault and sentenced to ninety-nine years’ imprisonment.

In his present application, Applicant raises four grounds. This application, however, presents

a more serious question. This Court’s records reflect that Applicant has filed six prior applications

pertaining to this conviction. It is obvious from the record that Applicant continues to raise issues

that have been presented and rejected in previous applications or that should have been presented
2

in previous applications. The writ of habeas corpus is not to be lightly or easily abused. Sanders

v. U.S., 373 U.S. 1 (1963); Ex parte Carr, 511 S.W.2d 523 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974). Because of his

repetitive claims, we hold that Applicant’s claims are barred from review under Article 11.07, § 4,

and are waived and abandoned by his abuse of the writ. This application is dismissed.

Therefore, we instruct the Honorable Abel Acosta, Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals,

not to accept or file the instant application for a writ of habeas corpus, or any future application

pertaining to this conviction unless Applicant is able to show in such an application that any claims

presented have not been raised previously and that they could not have been presented in a previous

application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Bilton, 602 S.W.2d 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980).

Copies of this order shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Filed: October7, 2015

Do not publish
#### The State ex rel. Strothers, Appellant, *v.*Gorden, Mayor, Appellee.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Strothers v. Gorden*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 436.]

*437(No. 98-1208

Submitted August 19, 1998

Decided October 28, 1998.)

*Gerald O. Strothers, Jr. ', pro se.*

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
(April 6, 1967)

#### Shirley Tarshish, Respondent, v. Isaiah Tarshish, Appellant.

Order, entered May 17,1966, unanimously modified, on the law, without costs or disbursements to either party, to grant motion to the extent of striking from the complaint such part of the alleged cause of action and such part of the prayer for relief as seeks recovery of an in personam judgment against defendant for support and maintenance of the plaintiff and for counsel fees. In this action for a separation and for alimony and counsel fees, the plaintiff alleges that the defendant is a resident of Omaha in the State of Nebraska. Inasmuch as the service of the summons and complaint herein was made upon the defendant in the State of Nebraska, the court has not acquired in personam jurisdiction over the defendant. Although the matrimonial domicile of the parties was in this State and the plaintiff resides here, CPLR 302 is inapplicable to permit the court to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Of course, the court has in rem jurisdiction to grant a judgment of separation and may award alimony and counsel fees payable out of any property of defendant duly sequestered within the State. Concur — Eager, J. P., Steuer, Capozzoli, Rabin and McNally, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 24.4

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

         KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby
constitutes and appoints each of Beverly L. Brown, Robert K. Kretzman, Lawrence
E. Kreider and Joram C. Salig or any of them, each acting alone, his true and
lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution, for him and
his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with the
THE COSMETIC CENTER, INC. (the "Corporation") Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 27, 1997 (the "Form 10-K") under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including, without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in the name and on behalf of the
Corporation or on behalf of the undersigned as a director or officer of the
Corporation, and any amendments to the Form 10-K and any instrument, contract,
document or other writing, of or in connection with the Form 10-K or amendments
thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents
in connection therewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities
and Exchange Commission and any applicable securities exchange or securities
self-regulatory body, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each
acting alone, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to
all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying
and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone,
or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed these presents this 17
day of March, 1998.

                             /s/ GEORGE FELLOWS
                             --------------------------------
                             GEORGE FELLOWS
#### § 201.1 Meaning of words.

Words in the regulations in this part in the singular form shall be deemed to import the plural, and vice versa, as the case may demand.

[5 FR 28, Jan. 4, 1940]
MEDIATION REFERRALS

2006-1000.

#### Colonial Village Ltd. v. Washington Cty. Bd. of Revision.

Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2004-A-574.

The following case has been referred to mediation pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6):
* 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 July 13, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-51277 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSE CONTRERAS-PONCE, also known as Jose Luis Luna, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-545

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose ContrerasPonce raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
# DroneTM Finder
PRE-FLIGHT CHECKLIST* HULL AND PROPELLORS 

# D iAn hull screws are securely fastened to the body ofthe UAS. 

# D !An propellers are securely fastened to the motors
. 

# D ! Transmitters and accompanying wires are securely fastened to the hull. 

# D l camera(s) , girnbal(s) , and accompanying wires are securely fastened to the hull
. 

# D ! There are no loose parts , wires , screws, or extremities that can fall from the UAS. ! operators Notes: SAFETY CHECK 

# D I The operator performed a visual review ofthe area ofoperation
. 

# D I The operator is aware ofaerial obstructions (i
.e. , poles , structures, utility wires , trees). 

# D I The operator is not within 3-miles of an airport
. 

# D I The operator clearly marked a take-off /landing zone with 4 orange caution cones . 

# D I The operator has clearly announced that a UAS is preparing for flight. 

# D I The operator has ensured no persons or animals are near the caution zone. 

# D ! weather permits the safe operation ofthe UAS (i
.e ., little to no wind, no precipitation, 

# D I Ifworking in pairs, the second operator has a pair ofbinoculars to maintain line of sightl ! operators Notes: I POWER TO SYSTEM 

# D I The batte!:Y being placed into the UAS has a full capacity charge. 

# D I The batteries inside the RC controller have a sufficient charge. 

# D ! There is a spare UAS battery with a full charge. 

# D ! There are spare batteries for the RC controller with a full charge
. 

# D I The UAS battery is securely fastened within the UAS hull 

# D I The UAS powers up completely indicating a normal audible chime of operability
. 

# D jAlllights on the UAS are operating normally. ! operators Notes: RC/WIFI/FPV CONNECTIVITY 

# D ! There is a steady connection between the RC controller and the UAS
. 

# D ! There is a steady connection between the video transmitter and the FPV receiver. 

# D I The UAS is responding accurately and efficiently to RC commands
. 

# D I\'ideo equipment is responding accurately and efficiently to FPV commands
. 

# D W Pv OSD is operational. 

# D IReController is set to GPS and HL and CL modes are both turned off. ! operators Notes: SATELLITE CONNECTIVITY 

# D I UAS is indicating full satellite/GPS connectivit y . 

# D I UAS has set the " home" location
. 

# D I Following take-off , UAS successfully completes a 1 0-second unassisted hover. ! operators Notes:
Date:

________ _ 

## * All UAS Operators must perform this pre-flight checklist prior to every respective flight. I I
#### § 2700.2 Organization.

The Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM) was established on January 12, 1982. Delegations of authority to the Director, OIRM appear at 7 CFR 2.81. The organization is comprised of five headquarters divisions, an administrative staff and three computer centers to serve the Department. The organization is headed by the Director or, in the Director's absence, by the Deputy Director or, in the absence of both, by the Director's desginee.
exv10wee



 






EXHIBIT 10ee




ROWAN COMPANIES, INC.

2004 BONUS PLAN




	 	 	 
	Eligibility

	 	Executive and other officers, managers and certain key
employees (approximately 75 employees), arranged in
6 Tiers generally by salary and/or responsibility level
	 
	 	 
	Measurement Criteria

	 	Drilling EBITDA, defined as
GAAP-based EBITDA from Drilling segment operations, relative to Budget

	 
	 	 
	Bonus Target

	 	Bonus Target varies for each of 6 Tiers, with equal
percentage for each member of a Tier:






	 	 	 	 	 
	

	 	Tier I — 75% of Base Pay

Tier II — 55%

Tier III — 40%

	 	Tier IV — 25%

Tier V — 15%

Tier VI — 10%






	 	 	 
	Offset

	 	Any Bonus Award is offset by Profit Sharing Award (thus,
Bonus Target is maximum total award under both plans)





[Information omitted regarding target levels with respect to specific
quantitative or qualitative performance related-factors, or factors or criteria
involving confidential commercial or business information, the disclosure of
which would have an adverse effect on the registrant.]
#### § 2500.026 Applicant feedback.

Unsuccessful applicants may submit a request for applicant feedback in writing to OAO within 10 days after receiving written notice of not being selected for further processing. Applicant feedback requests are to be mailed to the Program Leader at the address below, unless otherwise stated in the “Notice of Non-Selection” or in the RFP. At OAO's discretion, either written or oral feedback will be provided to unsuccessful applicants.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Departmental Management, Office of Advocacy and Outreach, *Attn:* Program Leader (Applicant Feedback), Whitten Building, Rm. 520-A, stop 9821, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9821.
exv10w20



 





Exhibit 10.20




Tommy L. Andrews, John B. (Jack) Benton, Kathleen Flanagan, Rahul Gupta, Michele J. Langstaff and
Kevin L. Reager have entered into Transition Assistance Agreements that are substantially identical
in all respects to the Agreement with Clyde L. Thomas filed as Exhibit 10.34 to the Company’s
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

KIMBERLY KAYE SELBY,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:20cv2335/MCR/EMT

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

 Defendant.

__________________________/

ORDER

The chief magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on February 

10, 2022 (ECF No. 26). The parties were furnished a copy of the Report and 

Recommendation and afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, 

United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). There have been no timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation and the record, I have 

determined the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 

26) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. Plaintiff is awarded fees in the amount of $5,679.36 for time expended 

by her counsel in representing her before the United States District Court for the 

Case 3:20-cv-02335-MCR-EMT Document 27 Filed 04/22/22 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv2335/MCR/EMT

Northern District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (EAJA). The fee award is 

subject to an offset to satisfy any qualifying outstanding debt Plaintiff may owe to 

the United States.

3. Costs in the amount of $400.00 also are awarded to Plaintiff, to be paid 

from the Judgment Fund administered by the United States Treasury.

4. If Plaintiff receives all or any portion of the EAJA fee award, it must

be mailed to her in care of her attorney, Robert Ian Maclaren, III, Soloway Law 

Firm, 1013 Airport Blvd., Pensacola, Florida 32504.

DONE AND ORDERED this 22nd day of April 2022.

M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-02335-MCR-EMT Document 27 Filed 04/22/22 Page 2 of 2
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 27, 2017

No. 04

- 16

- 00831

- CV

WONG GROCERY CO., LLC

,

Appellant

v.

Patrick LAMBKIN et al

, Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court, B exar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- CI

- 10644 Honorable Solomon Casseb, III, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The court reporter ’ s notification of late record is hereby GRANTED. Time is extended to February 20, 2017. FURTHER EXTENSIONS OF TIME ARE DISFAVORED

.

_________________________________ Irene Ri os , Justice

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

court on this 27th day of January, 20 17

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### § 28.411 Good Middling Light Spotted Color.

Good Middling Light Spotted Color is color which in spot or color, or both, is between Good Middling Color and Good Middling Spotted Color.
From: "Joseph Rykowski" <Joseph.Rykowski@ormet.com>

To: Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 01/14/2011 02:33 PM

Subject: Ormet Primary Aluminum Corporation Air Emission Modeling Spreadsheets

Ms. Boyd,

Attached are the 2 spreadsheets that you asked to be comple ted by today, and also the Google Earth

(.kmz) file that you asked be submitted. If you have any further questions about these sheets, please e

mail me.

Joe Rykowski

Environmental Technician

Ormet Primary Aluminum Corp.
#### §§ 1717.1100-1717.1149 [Reserved]
§ 28.107 Original cotton standards and reserve sets. ( a ) The containers of the original Universal Standards and other official cotton standards of the United States currently adopted, whenever such official standards are represented by practical forms, shall be marked as prescribed in the order or orders of their establishment, and shall be wrapped and sealed. After being so marked, wrapped and sealed, they shall be held in secure storage in the custody of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Director may authorize the temporary removal of such containers from storage and the transporting of the containers to other locations for purposes of Universal Cotton Standards Conferences and other purposes as deemed necessary by the Director. Such containers shall remain in the control and custody of the Director until the original standards contained therein are superseded by new or revised standards.
( b ) At each Universal Cotton Standards Conference held for approving key copies of the Universal Standards there shall be prepared two full sets of practical forms of copies of such standards, which shall be known as “Reserve Sets” and which, upon the certification and recommendation of qualified experts, shall be certified by such experts as true copies of the currently adopted standards as and when established. Such reserve sets shall be enclosed in metal-lined cases and sealed in the presence of a special committee duly authorized by the Director and composed of representatives from the associations attending the conference and the Department. The special committee shall deposit the set designated as the First Reserve Set in a vault in a bank in Memphis, Tenn. The Division shall keep the set designated as the Second Reserve Set in secure storage. These reserve sets shall remain sealed and deposited until such time as they shall be required for examination and use as set forth in paragraph (c) of this section.
( c ) At the beginning of the next Universal Cotton Standards Conference, a special committee duly authorized by the Director and composed of representatives from the associations attending the conference and the Department shall deliver the First Reserve Set from its storage place to the site of the conference. This special committee shall witness the opening of the First Reserve Set for display at the conference. The Director shall arrange for removal of the Second Reserve Set from its storage place and for the transport of such set to the site of the conference. If upon examination of the First Reserve Set by representatives at the conference it should appear that such set has undergone any substantial change, the Second Reserve Set shall be opened and used in its stead.
( d ) The First Reserve Set of each conference or the Second Reserve Set, if it has been used in place of the First Reserve Set, as provided in paragraph (c) of this section shall be retained by the Division until the currently adopted standards which they represent have been superseded by new or revised standards.
[30 FR 6637, May 14, 1965, as amended at 48 FR 16874, Apr. 20, 1983; 52 FR 30883, Aug. 18, 1987]
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.

§ 1951.707 Determination of the amount of unauthorized assistance. ( a ) *Unauthorized loan amount.* The unauthorized loan amount will be the unauthorized principal plus any interest accruing on the unauthorized principal at the note interest rate until the date paid unless otherwise agreed in writing by Rural Development.
( b ) *Unauthorized grant amount.* The unauthorized amount will be the unauthorized grant amount actually expended under the grant agreement plus interest accrued beginning on the date of the demand letter at the interest rate stipulated in the applicable grant agreement, or, if none is stated, the default rate established by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, until the date paid unless otherwise agreed in writing by Rural Development.
Editorial Note on Subchapter C of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter C appear by Amdt. 381, 65 FR 64586, Oct. 30, 2000.

Editorial Note on Part 279
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 279 appear at 68 FR 41052, July 10, 2003.

§ 279.5 Determination of the designated reviewer. ( a ) *Basis for designated reviewer determination.* The designated reviewer shall make a determination based upon: ( 1 ) The information submitted by the appropriate FNS office;
( 2 ) Information submitted by the firm in support of its position; and
( 3 ) Any additional information, in writing, obtained by the designated reviewer from any other person having relevant information.
( b ) *Review of denial or withdrawal of authorization.* When the action under review is the denial of an application for authorization or the withdrawal of an existing authorization, the designated reviewer shall sustain the action under review; sustain the action under review, but specify a shorter period of time the action will remain in effect; or direct that the action under review be reversed.
( c ) *Review of disqualification or civil money penalty or fine.* When the action under review is disqualifying a firm from program participation or assessing a civil money penalty or fine against a firm, the designated reviewer shall: Sustain the action under review; specify a shorter period of disqualification; specify a reduced money penalty or fine; direct that an official warning letter be issued to the firm in lieu of a disqualification, civil money penalty or fine; or, direct that the action under review be reversed. The designated reviewer may change a disqualification of a firm to a civil money penalty if the disqualification would cause a hardship to participating households (except in the case of a permanent disqualification). The designated reviewer, working with the appropriate FNS office, shall determine if circumstances warrant a civil money penalty in accordance with § 278.6 of this chapter.
( d ) *Review of denial of claim.* In the case of a request for review of a denial of all or part of a claim of a firm, the determination of the designated reviewer shall sustain the action under review or shall specify the amount of the claim to be paid by FNS.
( e ) *Determination notifications.* FNS shall notify the firm of the determination. Such notification will be sent to the representative of the firm who filed the request for review.
( f ) *Effective date.* The determination of the designated reviewer shall take effect 30 days after the date of delivery of the determination to the firm.
[Amdt. 136, 43 FR 43279, Sept. 22, 1978, as amended by Amdt. 334, 57 FR 3913, Feb. 3, 1992; Amdt. 356, 59 FR 29714, June 9, 1994. Redesignated and amended at 68 FR 41053, July 10, 2003]