alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURTROOM DEPUTY MINUTES DATE: 9/27/06 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

DIGITAL RECORDING: 11:02 -11:06 

/ INITIAL APPEARANCE

 DETENTION HEARING 

 REMOVAL HEARING (R.40) 

/ ARRAIGNMENT 

 ARRAIGNMENT on SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT 

 PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 

PRESIDING MAG. JUDGE VANZETTA PENN MCPHERSON DEPUTY CLERK: WANDA ROBINSON 

CASE NO. 3:06cr204-MEF DEFT. NAME: Henry Erik Yapias

USA: Susan Redmond ATTY: Samuel Walker 

Type Counsel: ( ) Retained; ( ) Panel CJA; ( ) Waived; (/ ) CDO ;

USPTSO/ USPO: 

Defendant does / does NOT need an interpreter; NAME 

 Kars. Date of Arrest or G karsr40

/ kia. Deft. First Appearance. Advised of rights/charges. Pro/Sup Rel Violator

/ Finaff. Financial Affidavit executed  to be obtained by PTS; / ORAL Motion for Appt. Of Counsel. 

/ koappted ORAL ORDER appointing Federal Defender - Notice to be filed.

20appt. Panel Attorney Appointed;  to be appointed - prepare voucher

 Deft. Advises he will retain counsel. Has retained 

 Government’ s ORAL (kgoralm.) Motion for Detention Hrg.  To be followed by written motion;

 Government’ sWRITTEN Motion for Detention Hrg. filed. 

 DETENTION HRG  held;  set for ;  Prelim. Hrg  Set for 

 kotempdtn. ORDER OF TEMPORARY DETENTION PENDING HEARING entered

kodtn. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL entered

 kocondrls. Release order entered.  Deft. advised of conditions of release.

kbnd.  BOND EXECUTED (M/D AL charges) $ Deft released (kloc LR)

 BOND EXECUTED (R.40 charges) - deft to report to originating district as ordered

 Loc.(LC) Bond NOT executed. Deft to remain in Marshal’ s custody

 ko. Deft. ORDERED REMOVED to originating district

 kwvprl. Waiver of  Preliminary hearing;  Kwvr40hrg. (Waiver of R.40 Hearing)

 Court findsPROBABLE CAUSE. Defendant bound over to the Grand Jury.

/ Karr. ARRAIGNMENT SET FOR: / HELD. Plea of NOT GUILTY entered. 

 / Trial Term 11/27/06 ; / PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE: 10/13/0 

/ DISCOVERY DISCLOSURES DATE: 9/27/06 

 Krmknn. NOTICEto retained Criminal Defense Attorney handed to Counsel

 krmvhrg. Identity/Removal Hearing set for _______________________________

 Kwvspt Waiver of Speedy Trial Act Rights Executed. 

Case 3:06-cr-00204-MEF-CSC Document 9 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 1 of 1
# SUBCHAPTER F - SPECIAL CATEGORIES OF CONTRACTING

- PART 2436 - CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS 
- PART 2437 - SERVICE CONTRACTING 
- PART 2439 - ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 

- PART 2436 - CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS    - Subpart 2436.6 - Architect-Engineer Services     - 2436.602   Selection of firms for architect-engineer contracts.
    - 2436.602-2   Evaluation boards.
    - 2436.602-4   Selection authority.
    - 2436.602-5   Short selection processes for contracts not to exceed the small purchase limitation.
- PART 2437 - SERVICE CONTRACTING    - Subpart 2437.1 - Service Contracts - General     - 2437.110   Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.
  - Subpart 2437.2 - Advisory and Assistance Services     - 2437.204   Guidelines for determining availability of personnel.
- PART 2439 - ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY    - 2439.107   Contract clauses.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 242 (Friday, December 17, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 78994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31533]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notice

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, December 14, 2010, at 10 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g. 
Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, 
U.S.C. Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings 
or arbitration.
    Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a 
particular employee.
* * * * *

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Shawn Woodhead Werth,
Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-31533 Filed 12-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
§ 1003.3 Appearance before the OHA. ( a ) An interested person may make an appearance, including a personal appearance at the discretion of the OHA, and participate in any proceeding described in this part on his own behalf or by a duly authorized representative. Any document filed by a duly authorized representative must contain a statement by such person certifying that he is a duly authorized representative.
( b ) The OHA may deny, temporarily or permanently, in whole or in part, the privilege of participating in proceedings, including oral presentation, to any individual who is found by the OHA— ( 1 ) To have made false or misleading statements, either orally or in writing;
( 2 ) To have filed false or materially altered documents, affidavits or other writings;
( 3 ) To lack the specific authority to represent the party or participant; or
( 4 ) To have engaged in or to be engaged in conduct that substantially disrupts a proceeding.
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Mem orandum Opinion filed October

23 , 2018
.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 18 -00642- CV

DEBORAH MOHAMED, Appellant

V. SHAFFIN ALI MOHAMED, Appellee
On Appeal from the 247th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2003-39225

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N This is an appeal from a judgment signed June 28, 2018. On October 5, 2018, appellant and appellee filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted.
Ac cordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Donovan, Wise, and Jewell.
# it s Q U.S . Departmen t 800 Independenc e Ave. , S.W . o f Transportatio n Washington , D.C . 2059 1 Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Mr . Larry L . Davi s AP R1 5 201 0 141 2 FourthAve . Jackson , M S 3902 3 an db y e-mai l t o davisl3030@hotmail.co m Alan L . Moore , Esq . ^ Bake r Donelso n Bearma n Caldwel l & Beriowit z :~0" ?

- - H P . O . Bo x 1416 7 Jackson , M S 3923 6 an db y facsimil e t o 60 1 -714-991 4 , ^ Re : I n th e matte r

o f Larry L . t)avi s v . Th e Jackso n Municipa l Airport Authority , Docke t 16-10-01 ; Respondent' s Motio n for Extensio n o f

Tim e for Answer . Dea r Messrs . Davi s an dMoore : Th e Respondent , Jackso n Municipa l Airport Authority , throug hcounsel , ha s move dfo r a n extensio n o f

tim e unti l May 17 , 2010 , t o file it s Answer . Th e Motion wa s supporte dwitha statemen t saying , amon g othe r

reasons , that

th e Respondent' s Counse l require dadditional tim e t o revie w an dassembl e documents , intervie w staff , an dconduc t

legal research . Th e reason s fo r th e delay sho w goo dcaus e t o exten dth e tim e for th e Rebuttal . Th e Complainan t

ha s responde dt o th e motio n stating , amon g othe r assertions , that

th e tim e fo

r filin g th e motio n ha drun , tha t Respondent' s Counse l ha s ha dnotic e o f th e proceedin g fo

r a sufficient amoun t o f tim e t o submi t

atimel y Answer , an dtha t Respondent' s Counse l lack s goo d caus e fo r th e extension . Th e FA A ha s considere dth e Complainant' s objectio n t o th e Respondent' s motion . However , i t doe s not appear tha t an extensio n wil l prejudic e th e Complainant . I n consideratio n o f th e goo dcaus e show n b y th e Respondent , an dth e nee dt o develo p afull an dcomplet e recor di n thi s matter , i t i s i n th e bes t

interes t t o gran t th e Respondent' s motion . Th e time , therefore , for

submittin g th e Answe r

wil l expir e o n Ma y 17 , 2010 . Sincerely , laymon dVeatc h Attorney , Airport s La w Branc h(AGC-610 ) Airport an dEnvironmenta l La w Division Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse lFederal Aviatio n Administratio n

80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Roo m900- E Washington , D.C . 2059 1 (202 ) 267-319 9 (office ) (202 ) 267-967 6 (direct ) (202 ) 267-576 9 (fax ) cc : ACR- 4 Part 1 6 docke t

cler k
#### Tennessee Valley Fertilizer Company *v.*Stevens.

October 15, 1913.

Discharge in bail-trover. Before Judge Walker. Warren superior court. July 9, 1913.

*M. E. Evans,*for plaintiif.

*E. P. Davis*and *M. L. Pelts,*for defendant.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Where an action for the recovery of personalty has heen brought, and the defendant has been imprisoned under bail process, upon an application by him to be discharged under the Civil Code (1910), § 5154, the questions of fact raised for determination are whether the defendant can neither give security nor produce the property, and whether the reasons for its non-production are satisfactory.

*(a)*To allege and prove that guano, which was the'subject-matter of the action, could not be produced because it had been bought and placed in the ground as a fertilizer, is legitimate as showing a satisfactory reason for the non-production.

(&) Allegations and evidence for the purpose of showing that the action was maliciously brought by the plaintiff, and not bona fide to recover the property, were not relevant to the issue in such a proceeding.

2. The uncontradicted evidence fully authorized, if it did not demand, the order discharging the defendant on his own recognizance; and the judgment will not be reversed because the ruling in the respect indicated in the last subdivision of the preceding headnote may not have been accurate.

*(a)*In order that the order of discharge, based upon a petition containing allegations of malice and want of probable cause on the part of the plaintiff, may not be taken as adjudicating those facts; direction is given that the judgment be so amended as to strike from the petition for discharge such averments.

*■Judgment affirmed, with direction.*

*All the Justices concur.*
Order filed August 10, 2021. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-21-00141-CV

____________

WLSC INCOPRO, LLC, Appellant

V.

ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 152nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2017-24459

ORDER

Appellant is not represented by counsel in this appeal. Rather, appellant is 

attempting to represent itself pro se through a corporate officer who is not an 

attorney. Except for the performance of ministerial tasks, corporations may appear 

and be represented only by a licensed attorney. Kunstoplast of Am., Inc. v. 

Formosa Plastics Corp., U.S.A., 937 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1996); see also Dell 

Dev. Corp. v. Best. Indus. Uniform Sup. Co., 743 S.W.2d 302, 303 (Tex. App.—

Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ denied). 

Accordingly, we order appellant to retain counsel for this appeal and to 

provide proof of the retention on or before September 10, 2021. Appellant’s 
counsel will also need to file an amended notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 

25.1(g). If appellant does not comply, the court will dismiss the appeal on its own 

motion for failure to comply with our order. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b), 42.3(c). 

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Jewell, Spain, and Wilson.
Meeting to Discuss Mercury Emissions Data and MACT Analysis Proposed Portland Cement NESHAP

June 10, 200 9
Meeting Date: June 1 0 , 200 9
Participants: Cement Industry

Hector Ybanez, Holcim William Mills, Mills Consulting US EPA Keith Barnett, SPPD RTI Marvi n Branscome Mike Laney Brenda Munoz

The primary

purpose of the meeting was for EPA to hear the questions from industry regarding the t yp e of analy sis that was used to arrive at the proposed MACT floor limits. Industry ’s goal was to be sure they understo od EPA approach in developing the proposed MACT floor limits. EPA’s approach that was used to develop estimates of daily mercury emissions was discussed as well as the statistical a naly sis for determining the proposed emission limit

. It was agreed that D r. Mills and Mr. Ybanez would summarize their understanding of the EPA approach based on these discussions and submit them to EPA for review and verification (or for further clarification if needed).

.
#### In the Matter of Anne Slote, Appellant, v. Frederic S. Berman, as Commissioner of the Department of Rent and Housing Maintenance of the City of New York, Respondent, and Carol Boyer, Intervenor-Respondent.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs and disbursements. Although we conclude that the landlord believed .that the accommodations, were decontrolled and in good faith sought a determination of decontrol, we conclude that the accommodations, although decontrolled by the 1947 Federal Housing and Rent Act (61 U. S. Stat. 198; § 204, subd. [b]) as premises subjected to a valid written lease, were recontrolled by the Federal 1949 amendatory act (63 U. S. Stat. 22; § 204, subd. [b], par. [3]). Concur — Stevens, P. J., Eager, Tilzer, Markewich and Steuer, JJ.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

EASTERN DIVISION (OPELIKA) 

ELIZABETH LYNNE HUTCHINSON ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 

3:06-cv-00700-WHA 

THE PHENIX CITY BOARD OF ) 

EDUCATION and LARRY E. DiCHIARA ) 

 ) 

 Defendants ) 

DEFENDANTS’ EXHIBITS LIST

 Come now the Defendants, Phenix City Board of Education and Larry E. DiChiara, by 

and through their attorney, Sydney S. Smith, and list the following as exhibits in the trial of this 

case. Counsel for the parties had agreed on June 25, 2007 to extend the time for each party to file 

Witness Lists and Exhibit Lists until July 12, 2007. 

1. All documents and/or exhibits designated in any of the Interrogatories; Requests for 

 Production; and the Answers to Interrogatories; Responses to Request for Production 

 of the Plaintiff or Defendants and any documents and/or exhibits designated in 

 any Depositions taken in this case. 

2. Plaintiff’s personnel files. 

3. Any reports of injuries and treatments; and written reports, grievances or statements of 

 Plaintiff complaining about her working conditions. 

4. Portions of the personnel files of any employees of Defendant Board which might be 

 relevant to Plaintiff’s claims or Defendants’ defenses. 

5. The relevant policies, procedures and rules of Defendant Board. 

6. Records relating to any prior employment of Plaintiff. 

7. Records relating to any prior civil and criminal legal matters involving Plaintiff and/or 

 her family. 

8. Any other documents and/or exhibits which might be discovered prior to trial which 

 relate in any manner to the allegations contained in Plaintiff’s Complaint and the 

 defenses of Defendant. 

9. All documents and/or exhibits needed for rebuttal or impeachment purposes. 

10. Defendants reserve the right to amend their exhibit list should documents and/or 

 exhibits relevant to Plaintiff’s claims and Defendants’ defenses become known to 

 Defendants. 

11. Defendants’ reserve the right to utilize any exhibits designated by Plaintiff. 

Case 3:06-cv-00700-WHA-WC Document 44 Filed 07/03/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

12. Any documents and/or exhibits needed for rebuttal and/or impeachment. 

13. Relevant excerpts from depositions taken in this case. 

14. All Pleadings in this case. 

 This the 3rd day of July 2007. 

 

Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/Sydney S. Smith 

Smith & Smith, P.C. 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Russell County Board of Education 

Larry E. DiChiara 

1503 Broad Street 

Phenix City, AL 36867 

334-298-2679 

ASB-4248-T82S 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have served the Motion for Summary Judgment upon Plaintiff’s 

counsel, by electronic filing and by email on this 3rd day of July, 2007. 

 Joshua D. Wilson, Esq. 

 Rocco Calamusa, Jr., Esq. 

 Wiggins, Childs, Quinn & Pantazis, LLC. 

 The Kress Building 

 301 19th Street North 

 Birmingham, Alabama 35203 

jwilson@wcqp.com

rcalamusa@wcqp.com

 

 /s/ Sydney S. Smith 

Case 3:06-cv-00700-WHA-WC Document 44 Filed 07/03/2007 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3295 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3295

 To suspend temporarily the duty on electric juice extractors not less 
                            than 800 watts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 26, 2006

   Mr. Allen introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on electric juice extractors not less 
                            than 800 watts.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ELECTRIC JUICE EXTRACTORS NOT LESS THAN 800 WATTS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``      9902.85.15        Electric juice          Free      No change       No change       On or before 12/
                           extractors not less                                               31/2009          ''
                           than 800 watts                                                                      .
                           (provided for in
                           subheading
                           8509.40.00)..........

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
324.7001 Policy on Compliance with HIPAA

business associate contract requirements.

(a) HHS is a HIPAA “covered entity” that is a “hybrid entity” as these terms are defined at sections

160.103 and 164.103 respectively. As such, only the portions of HHS that the Secretary has

designated as “health care components” (HCC) as defined at section 164.103, are subject to HIPAA.

HHS' HCCs may utilize persons or entities known as “business associates,” as defined at section

160.103. Generally, “business associate” means a “person” as defined by section 160.103 (including

contractors, and third-party vendors, etc.) if or when the person or entity:

(1) Creates, receives, maintains, or transmits “protected health information”, as the term is defined

at section 160.103, on behalf of an HHS HCC to carry out HHS HIPAA “covered functions” as that

term is defined at 164.103; or

(2) Provides certain services to an HHS HCC that involve PHI.

(b) Where the Department as a covered entity is required by 45 CFR 164.502(e)

(1) and 164.504(e) and, if applicable, sections 164.308(b)(3) and 164.314(a), to enter into a HIPAA

business associate contract, the relevant HCC contracting officer, acting on behalf of the

Department, shall ensure that such contract meets the requirements at section 164.504(e)(2) and, if

applicable, section 164.314(a)(2).

Parent topic: Subpart 324.70 - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 86 Filed 09/18/2007 Page 1 of 1
1317.502-70 Policy.       All Interagency Acquisitions shall adhere to the policy set forth in CAM 1317.570.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1317.5 - Interagency Acquisitions Under the Economy Act
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**Section
      1350 Certification**





In
      connection with the quarterly report of China Industrial Waste Management,
      Inc.
      (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Guo Xin, Chief
      Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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 result of operations of the
      Company.





November
                14, 2008
            /s/
                Guo XinGuo
                XinChief
                Financial Officer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
#### § 958.4 Production area.

*Production area* means all territory included within the boundaries of the County of Malheur in Oregon, and all counties south and southeast of the southern boundary of Idaho County in the State of Idaho.
§ 900.302 Associations eligible to vote. ( a ) Any association of producers, not previously determined to be a cooperative association may file an application for a determination as to whether it is a cooperative association and thus eligible to vote in a referendum. Such application shall be filed with the Administrator at least 60 days prior to the holding of the referendum: *Provided, however,* That the Administrator may permit the filing of an application in less than 60 days when, in the opinion of the Administrator, such filing would not delay the conduct of the referendum.
( b ) Within a time fixed by the referendum agent, but not later than 5 days prior to the final date for balloting, each cooperative association electing to vote shall, upon the request of the referendum agent, furnish to him a certified list showing the name and address of each producer for whom it claims the right to vote and the plant at which such person's milk was received during the representative period.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RALPH WILSON LINGO, )

)

 Petitioner, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06-CV-703-MHT

)

STATE OF ALABAMA, et al., )

)

 Respondents. )

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon review of the document filed by the petitioner on June 27, 2008 (Court Doc.

No. 64), which the court construes to contain a motion for retrial on his state criminal

conviction for intimidating a witness, and for good cause, it is

ORDERED that this motion be and is hereby DENIED. 

Done this 30th day of June, 2008.

 /s/ Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 65 Filed 06/30/2008 Page 1 of 1