alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 93.13 Analytical methods. Official analyses for peanuts, nuts, corn, oilseeds, and related vegetable oils are found in the following manuals: ( a ) Approved Methods of the American Association of Cereal Chemists (AACC), American Association of Cereal Chemists/Eagan Press, 3340 Pilot Knob Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55121-2097.
( b ) ASTA's Analytical Methods Manual, American Spice Trade Association (ASTA), 560 Sylvan Avenue, P.O. Box 1267, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632.
( c ) Analyst's Instruction for Aflatoxin (August 1994), S&T Instruction No. 1, USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service, Science and Technology, 3521 South Agriculture Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456.
( d ) Official Methods and Recommended Practices of the American Oil Chemists' Society (AOCS), American Oil Chemists' Society, P.O. Box 3489, 2211 West Bradley Avenue, Champaign, Illinois 61821-1827.
( e ) Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC INTERNATIONAL, Volumes I & II, AOAC INTERNATIONAL, 481 North Frederick Avenue, Suite 500, Gaithersburg, MD 20877-2417.
( f ) Standard Analytical Methods of the Member Companies of Corn Industries Research Foundation, Corn Refiners Association (CRA), 1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20006.
( g ) U.S. Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center's Military Specifications, approved analytical test methods noted therein, Code NPP-9, Department of Defense Single Stock Point (DODSSP) for Military Specifications, Standards, Building 4/D, 700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094.
[65 FR 64317, Oct. 26, 2000]
#### Mike Sand, Appellant-Respondent, v Lykes Bros. Steamship Co., Inc., Respondent-Appellant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the parties cross-appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 9, 1979, which granted defendant’s motion, pursuant to CPLR 4404, to set aside the jury’s verdict and directed a new trial unless plaintiff stipulate to accept a specified decreased damage award. Order reversed, with costs, motion denied and jury verdict reinstated. The jury’s verdict is supported by the record. Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion by granting defendant’s motion, *inter alia,*to set the verdict aside. Titone, J. P., Hangano, Hartuscello and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
2933.270 Department of Labor Board of Contract Appeals.       (a) The Department of Labor Board of Contract Appeals (LBCA) is authorized by the Secretary to consider and determine appeals from decisions of contracting officers arising under a contract, or relating to a contract, made by the Department or any other executive agency when such agency or the Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy has designated the LBCA to decide the appeal.          (b) The LBCA rules of procedure are contained in 41 CFR part 29-60.104, appearing in the July 1, 1983, edition of 41 CFR, subtitle A, chapters 19-100.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 2933.2 - Disputes and Appeals
52.211-13 Time Extensions.       As prescribed in 11.503(c), insert the following clause:          Time Extensions (Sept 2000)          Time extensions for contract changes will depend upon the extent, if any, by which the changes cause delay in the completion of the various elements of construction. The change order granting the time extension may provide that the contract completion date will be extended only for those specific elements related to the changed work and that the remaining contract completion dates for all other portions of the work will not be altered. The change order also may provide an equitable readjustment of liquidated damages under the new completion schedule.          (End of clause)    **Parent topic:** 52.211 [Reserved]
#### § 11.10 Maintenance of records.

Each record required by this part must be legible throughout the retention period specified by each Commission regulation. The record may be the original or a reproduced copy or a microform provided that the copy or microform is authenticated by authorized personnel and that the microform is capable of producing a clear copy throughout the required retention period. The record may also be stored in electronic media with the capability for producing legible, accurate, and complete records during the required retention period. Records such as letters, drawing, specification, must include all pertinent information such as stamps, initials, and signatures etc. The licensee shall maintain adequate safeguards against tampering with and loss of records.

[53 FR 19245, May 27, 1988]
O

CORRECTED METERS

on

WILMINGTON CANYON NW
SCALE 1:100,000 L-151
#### § 981.72 Reports of receipts.

Each handler receiving almonds for his own account shall tabulate such receipts by varieties and shall submit reports thereof to the Board in such form and at such intervals as the Board may prescribe for all receipts issued by him. Such reports shall be accompanied by duplicate copies of the receipts issued pursuant to the provisions of § 981.71 for all almonds included in such report. The Board, after checking such reports in such manner as it deems desirable, shall determine in the manner specified in § 981.60 the kernel weight of the almonds so received.

###### Effective Date Note

#### Effective Date Note:

At 40 FR 4416, Jan. 30, 1975, in § 981.72, the second sentence was suspended indefinitely.
#### In the Matter of Alfred M. Evans et al., Appellants, v. Board of Elections of the County of Nassau et al., and Irving Hahn, Respondents.

In a proceeding to validate petitions designating petitioners herein as candidates in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on June 17, 1969 for the Party position of County Committeeman for the 19th Election District of the 14th Assembly District of the County of Nassau, and for incidental relief, petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered June 4, 1969, which denied the application and dismissed the petition in the proceeding. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appellants are granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. Questions of law have arisen which ought to be reviewed. Beldoek, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Martuseello, JJ., concur.
#### CRANFORD v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 5, 1914.)

Action by Charles Cranford against the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company.

No opinion. Motion granted, without costs. See, also, 148 N. Y. Supp. 1111.
Editorial Note on Part 982
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 982 appear at 61 FR 17559, Apr. 22, 1996.

§ 982.31 Grower districts. ( a ) For the purpose of nominating grower members and alternate members, the following districts within the production area are hereby established: ( 1 ) District 1—The State of Washington, and Clackamas and Multnomah Counties in Oregon.
( 2 ) District 2—Marion and Polk Counties in Oregon.
( 3 ) District 3—Linn, Lane, and Benton Counties in Oregon.
( 4 ) District 4—Yamhill County in Oregon.
( 5 ) District 5—All other Oregon counties within the production area.
( b ) The Secretary, upon the recommendation of the Board, may reestablish districts within the production area and may reapportion grower membership among the various districts: *Provided,* That in recommending any such changes, the Board shall give consideration to ( 1 ) the relative importance of production in each district and the number of growers in each district;
( 2 ) the geographic location of districts as they would affect the efficiency of administering this part; and
( 3 ) other relevant factors.
[51 FR 29547, Aug. 19, 1986]
#### Anderson *v.*Humphries.

July 19, 1913.

Complaint; from Cobb superior court. Motion to dismiss

*B. 0. Lovett,*for plaintiff in error. *G. F. Gober,*contra.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Under the rulings in *Westfield*v. *Mayor etc. of Toccoa City,*80 *Ga.*735 (6 S. E. 471), and *Advance Lumber Co.*v. *Moreland,*132 *Ga.*852 (65 S. E. 86), a mere statement entered on a bill of exceptions, and signed by counsel for plaintiff in error, to the effect that he has served a copy of the bill of exceptions by delivering it to counsel ■ for defendant in error, with no official entry of service or affidavit thereof as provided by the statute, is not sufficient; and a case brought up by such bill of exceptions will be dismissed on motion.

2. The appearance in this court of counsel who represented the party in whose favor the judgment was rendered in the court below, and the making by him of a motion to dismiss the writ of error for want of service, among other grounds, does not operate as a waiver of service or an agreement for the case to proceed, under the Civil Code, § 6160, par. 3.

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
#### § 1044.08 Do you have to submit the documents for classification review before you give them to someone?

Yes, you must submit each document with a classification or control marking and any unmarked document generated in a classified or controlled subject area to the Inspector General. The Inspector General forwards each document to the Office of Classification for a determination as to whether the information in the document is properly classified, controlled, or may be released to the public.

[66 FR 4642, Jan. 18, 2001, as amended at 71 FR 68736, Nov. 28, 2006]
#### § 150.1 Purpose.

The regulations in this part provide certain exemptions to persons in Agreement States from the licensing requirements contained in chapters 6, 7, and 8 of the Act and from the regulations of the Commission imposing requirements upon persons who receive, possess, use or transfer byproduct material, source, or special nuclear material in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass; and to define activities in Agreement States and in offshore waters over which the regulatory authority of the Commission continues. The provisions of the Act, and regulations of the Commission apply to all persons in Agreement States and in offshore waters engaging in activities over which the regulatory authority of the Commission continues.

[46 FR 44151, Sept. 3, 1981]
370.701 Solicitation provision.

The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 352.270-9, Non-Discrimination for Conscience, in

solicitations valued at more than the micro-purchase threshold:

(a) In connection with the implementation of HIV/AIDS programs under the President's Emergency

Plan for AIDS Relief established by the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis

and Malaria Act of 2003, as amended; or

(b) Where the contractor will receive funding under the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,

Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003, as amended. In resolving any issues or complaints that

offerors may raise regarding meeting the requirements specified in the provision, the contracting

officer shall consult with the Office of Global Health Affairs, Office of the General Counsel, the

Program Manager, and other HHS officials, as appropriate.

Parent topic: Subpart 370.7 - Acquisitions Under the Leadership Act
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         360,917
<SECURITIES>                                 6,690,452
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,691,566
<PP&E>                                       2,117,341
<DEPRECIATION>                               (684,637)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,336,817
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          515,798
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,498
<COMMON>                                        37,384
<OTHER-SE>                                  21,775,367
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,336,817
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               338,186
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,348,734
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               673,096
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,683,644)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,683,644)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,683,644)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.25)


</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals S an Antonio, Texas
March 9, 2018
No. 04

- 17

- 00802

- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF L.A.D
- L., M.R.D
- L., U.A.D
- T, AND D.R.D
- T, CHILDREN,

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016PA00824 Honorable Martha B. Tanner, Judge Presidin g



### O R D E R In this parental rights termination case, the first court

- appointed attorney was allowed to withdraw because of a conflict. The trial court appointed new counsel, and we set Appellant’s brief due on March 8, 2018. The day before the brief was due, counsel moved this court to compel the trial court to supplement or correct the appellate record

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 34.5(c), (d); id. R. 34.6(d), (e). Counsel asserts that the order terminating Appell ant’s parental rights lists as statutory grounds subsections (D), (E), (N), and (O) from section 161.001(b)(1) and section 161.003, but only subsections (D), (E), and (O) and section 161.003 are listed in the judge’s handwritten notes. See T EX

. F AM

. C ODE A NN

. § § 161.001(b)(1), 161.003 (West Supp. 2017). “[A] judge ’ s notes are for his or her own convenience and form no part of the record .” In re A.W., 384 S.W.3d 872, 873 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2012, no pet.) ; accord In re L.H. , No. 04

- 13

- 00174

- CV, 2013 WL 3804585, at *1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio July 17, 2013, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.)

. The judge’s handwritten notes from October 16, 2017, lack the requisites of a final, appealable order ; they are for the judge’s convenience only

. See L.H. , 2013 WL 3804585, at *1 ; A.W., 384 S.W.3d at 873 . The trial court’s signed, written order of November 17, 2017, controls. Appellant’s motion to correct or supplement the appellate record is DENIED. Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file the brief is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief is due on March 28, 2018. Any further motion for extension of time to file the brief is discouraged. S ee T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN

. 6.2 (directing courts of appeals to dis pose of parental rights termination suits “[w]ithin 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed”)._________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 9th day of March, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE , Clerk of Court
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Camera Platforms, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 of the Company fully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





November 18, 2002

/s/ Xuedong Hu

Name: Xuedong Hu

Title: Chief Executive Officer





/s/ Terence Sien

Name: Terence Sien

Title: Chief Financial Officer





10
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed December 7, 2018.

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 01354

- CR No. 05

- 18

- 01355

- CR LATRICIA FURRER , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee
On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District Court

Kaufman County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 14

- 10102

- 422

- F & 16

- 30574

- 422

- F


### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang

- Miers, Fillmore, and Myers

Opinion by Justice Fillmore On November 7, 201 8, Latricia Furrer filed her notice of appeals in the above cases. The

trial court clerk informed the Court that although motion s to revoke Furrer’s community supervision ha d been filed in these cases, the hearing on the motions is s cheduled for January 2 019. An appellate court has jurisdiction to determine an appeal only if the appeal is authorized by law. Abbott v. State , 271 S.W.3d 694, 696

– 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Appellate courts may consider criminal appeals only after conviction or the entry of a narrow set of appealable interlocutory orders. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.2(a)(1); Wright v. State , 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.

— Dallas 1998, no pet.).– 2

–

Here, although motions to revoke Furrer’s probation have been filed, t he trial court has not yet ruled on the motion s

. Thus , t here are no final judgment s or otherwise appealable orders in

th ese case s

. Under these circumstances, we conclude we lack jurisdiction.

We dismiss th ese appeal s for want of jurisdiction.

Do Not Publish T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b)

181354F.U05 /Robert M. Fillmore/ ROBERT M. FILLMORE JUSTICE– 3

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

LATRICIA FURRER, Appellant

No. 05

- 18

- 01354

- CR V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District Court, Kaufman County, Texas. Trial Court Cause No. 14

- 10102

- 422

- F. Opinion delivered by Justice Fillmore. Justices Lang

- Miers and Myers participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Judgment entered this 7th day of December, 2018.– 4

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

LATRICIA FURRER, Appellant

No. 05

- 18

- 01355

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District Court, Kaufman County, Texas. Trial Court Cause No. 16

- 30574

- 422

- F. Opinion delivered by Justice Fillmore. Justices Lang

- Miers and Myers participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Judgment entered this 7 th day of December, 2018.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CR. NO. 3:06-cr-204-MEF

)

HENRY ERIK YAPIAS )

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the government's motion for release of prisoner filed on

October 12, 2006, and for good cause, it is ORDERED that the motion be and hereby is

GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that the United States Marshals Service release custody of

Henry Erik Yapias, to Keith Jordan, Lee County Sheriff’s Office, on October 13, 2006,

through February 13, 2007, so that said agent can take such prisoner into custody without the

necessity of the presence of a Deputy United States Marshal.

It is further ORDERED that Keith Jordan, Lee County Sheriff’s Office, return said

prisoner into the custody of the United States Marshals Service when he has finished with

him.

Done this 13 day of October, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cr-00204-MEF-CSC Document 13 Filed 10/13/2006 Page 1 of 1
EX-35.3
(logo) MIDLAND    (logo) PNC
       LOAN              REAL ESTATE
       SERVICES

OFFICER CERTIFICATE

Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
COMM 2012-CCRE5


March 1, 2013

Pursuant to the requirements of that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement
(the "Agreement"), it is hereby certified that on behalf of PNC Bank, National
Association d/b/a Midland Loan Services as successor by merger to Midland Loan
Services, Inc. (the "Servicer"),

(i) a review of the Servicer's activities during the calendar year 2012 (the
"Reporting Period") and of its performance under the Agreement has been made
under the undersigned officer's supervision;
(ii) to the best of the undersigned officer's knowledge, based on such review,
the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all
material respects throughout the Reporting Period or, if there has been a
failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material respect, each such
failure known to the undersigned officer and the nature and status thereof are
set forth below; and

Nature and Status of Failures: None.

PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCATION
d/ba MIDLAND LOAN SERVICES


/s/ Steven W. Smith
Steven W. Smith
Executive Vice President

Member of The PNC Financial Services Group

10851 Mastin Boulevard  Overland Park, Kansas 66210
800-327-8083
www.pnc.com/midland
#### ZELLER v. LEITER.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 12, 1906.)

Action by William F. Zeller against Joseph Leiter.

No opinion. Motion denied. Order filed.
649.111 Review of proposed settlements.

All proposed termination settlements shall be reviewed and approved by the Office of the Legal

Adviser for legal sufficiency. In addition,

(a) All proposed termination settlements from domestic contracting activities shall be approved by

the head of the contracting activity, with the exception of termination settlements on simplified

acquisitions and no-cost termination settlements; and,

(b) All proposed termination settlements from overseas contracting activities shall be approved by

the Procurement Executive.

Parent topic: Subpart 649.1—General Principles
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2
                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Intervoice, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Craig
E. Holmes, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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: October 14, 2003

                                                 /s/ Craig E. Holmes
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Craig E. Holmes
                                                 Executive Vice President and
                                                 Chief Financial Officer