alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 21, 2020

No. 04-20-00010-CV

IN RE CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

On January 7, 2020, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus, in which it requested a 

stay of the January 27, 2020 trial setting pending final resolution of the petition for writ of 

mandamus. After considering the petition and the record, this court concludes relator did not 

satisfy its burden to show its entitlement to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ 

of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). Relator’s request for a stay is denied as 

moot. This court’s opinion will issue at a later date.

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

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

court on this 21st day of January, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

Clerk of Court

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 18-10-36490-MCV, styled Ronnie Villanueva v. Juan Fernandez, Roberto 

Verduzco, and The Cincinnati Insurance Co., pending in the 293rd Judicial District Court, Maverick County, Texas,

the Honorable Maribel Flores presiding.
# Official Journal C 28/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 28 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6519 January 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 28

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6519 January 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 28/01 | Euro exchange rates — 18 January 2022 | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 28/01

Euro exchange rates — 18 January 2022

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### § 313.142 Request for administrative offset.

The Director shall request administrative offset under § 313.140, as soon as practical after completion of the applicable procedures in order to help ensure that offset be initiated prior to expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. At such time as the debtor makes a claim for payments from the Fund, if at least a year has elapsed since the offset request was originally made, the debtor shall be permitted to offer a satisfactory repayment plan in lieu of offset upon establishing that changed financial circumstances would render the offset unjust.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          49,904
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             114
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   470
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    438,173
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         261,785
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           235,829
<LOANS>                                        665,727
<ALLOWANCE>                                      7,002
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,496,747
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,024,516
<SHORT-TERM>                                   274,434
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             24,019
<LONG-TERM>                                     95,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,450
<OTHER-SE>                                      68,328
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,496,747
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 49,332
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               36,500
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    57
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                85,889
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              34,489
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              49,502
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           36,387
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,217
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                (96)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 36,617
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,373
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,373
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,947
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.76
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.96
<LOANS-NON>                                      5,323
<LOANS-PAST>                                       513
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   106
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  7,676
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 7,222
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,960
<RECOVERIES>                                       523
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                7,002
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,628
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            374


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 82 (Thursday, April 27, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24670-24671]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10542]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA-00-890, MM Docket No. 00-68, RM-9854]


Digital Television Broadcast Service; Norfolk, VA

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commission requests comments on a petition filed by WTKR-

[[Page 24671]]

TV, Inc. licensee of station WTKR-TV, NTSC Channel 3, Norfolk, 
Virginia, requesting the substitution of DTV Channel 40 for station 
WTKR-TV's assigned DTV Channel 58. DTV Channel 40 can be allotted to 
Norfolk, Virginia, in compliance with the principle community coverage 
requirements of Section 73.625(a) at reference coordinates 36-48-56 N. 
and 76-28-00 W. As requested, we propose to allot DTV Channel 40 to 
Norfolk with a power of 1000 (kW) and a height above average terrain 
(HAAT) of 313 meters.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before June 12, 2000, and reply 
comments on or before June 27, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., 
Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with 
the FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner, or its counsel 
or consultant, as follows: Arthur B Goodkind, Koteen & Naftalin, 
L.L.P., 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036 
(Counsel for WTKR-TV, Inc.).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 00-68, adopted April 19, 
2000, and released April 21, 2000. The full text of this Commission 
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, 
DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, 
Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Digital television broadcasting.

    Federal Communications Commission.
Barbara A. Kreisman,
Chief, Video Services Division, Mass Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-10542 Filed 4-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### OLIVE TOZER WALDREF v. GRANT WALDREF.1

December 1, 1916.

Nos. 20,047—(179).

Divorce — petition for permission to visit son.

Evidence that visits from the father would injuriously affect the son. *Held:*The court did not abuse its discretion in denying the petition. [Reporter.]

Application to the district court for Washington county to amend a decree of divorce so that defendant Grant Waldref might visit his minor child. The application was opposed by plaintiff. The matter was heard before Nethaway, J„ who denied the motion. From the order denying the appli- • cation, defendant appealed.

Affirmed.

*Thomas C. Daggett,*for appellant.

*Clapp & Macartney,*for respondent.

1

Reported in 159 N. W. 1068.

Per Curiam.

The parties intermarried on June 13, 1907, and lived together as husband and wife until September 13, 1910. A son was born to them July 25, 1908. On September 13, 1910, the defendant, without cause, wilfully deserted the plaintiff and their child. On January 8, 1912, the plaintiff commenced an action against defendant in the district court of Washington county for divorce on the ground of wilful and wrongful desertion. He did not appear in the action, and on February 26, 1912, a judgment and decree was entered dissolving the bonds of matrimony existing between the parties, and awarding to the plaintiff the care and custody of the infant child, Grant Tozer Waldref, during his minority.

On June 3, 1916, defendant petitioned the district court of Washington county for a modification and amendment of that part of the judgment and decree relating to the custody of the minor child so that the defendant might visit with said child at reasonable times and under. such conditions as would be reasonable and just. The matter having been submitted on affidavits and counter affidavits, the court on June 29, 1916, filed an order denying the petition. Defendant appeals.

“The test to determine the validity of the court’s order in such proceedings *474is, was there an abuse of discretion?” Arne v. Holland, 85 Minn. 401, 89 N. W. 3.

“The essential thing is the welfare of the child.” Arne v. Holland, supra. See also State v. White, 123 Minn. 508, 144 N. W. 157; Gauthier v. Walter, 110 Minn. 103, 124 N. W. 634.

There was evidence from which the court could find that this child is of a sensitive and nervous disposition; that unusual or undue excitement has a bad effect upon him; that it would be detrimental to his health to be visiif he were left in the sole custody and control of his mother. There was no ted by the father; and that the welfare of the child would be better secured abuse of discretion in denying the petition.

Order affirmed.
This map is intended for display purposes. No warranty is

made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the 

accuracy, reliability, or completeness of the data for individual

or aggregate use with other data, or for purposes not intended

by BLM. This map may not meet National Map Accuracy 

Standards. This product was developed through digital

means and information may be updated without notification.

Albers Equal Area, NAD83 Projection

Map generated by the Billings Field Office in July 2011

0 0.5 1 2 3 4

Miles

(

1 6 1 W

k

F

e

o

r

e

rk

C Rock

r C kcoR

kee Cr rae Bkeer C rae B

Wolf Creek

Maurice Creek

Se

Fork

el

No trh r

ey Creek

Sheridan

o uth F rk

Cr

So

31 eek

36 36 31 36 31

6

Grove Creek

1 1 6 1 6

keer C

ld

Go

Dilworth Creek

keer Cy ub R

North Line Creek

Line Creek

31

36 31 31 36

36

6

Route information and proposed management actions in this 

document only apply to Bureau of Land Management lands.

No route designations will be made on non-federal or private lands.

 The information on this map is developed from a variety of

 data sources and input scales may cause some misalignment of 

data layers. This map is for planning purposes only, and not 

intended for on-ground travel. 1:40,000

Wyoming

T

8

S

Custer

National Forest

T

9

S

72

R

re

e

vi

Fork Yellow

n

sto

rks

la

Montana R20E R21E C

Wyoming R103W R102W

T

58

N

Legend Location Map

Montana

Billings 

Field 

Office

±

State Boundary

National Forest Boundary

Grove Creek Travel Planning Area

Recommend Routes

Closed to All Vehicles: 46 Miles

Open with Additional Management: 18 Miles

Administrative Use Only: 9 Miles

Roads

Lakes

Streams

Bureau of Land Management 

Division of State Lands

State Fish and Wildlife

Water

Public Lands Survey System

Private

U.S. Forest Service

Grove Creek

Travel Planning Area 

Alternative B

Map 148

Billings & Pompeys Pillar 

National Monument RMP / EIS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
Editorial Note on Part 747
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 747 appear at 84 FR 1609, Feb. 5, 2019.

§ 747.2005 Enforcement of orders. ( a ) *Judicial remedies.* Whenever a credit union fails to comply with a directive imposing a discretionary supervisory action, or enforcing a mandatory supervisory action under part 702 of this chapter, the NCUA Board may seek enforcement of the directive in the appropriate United States District Court pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1786(k)(1).
( b ) *Administrative remedies* — ( 1 ) *Failure to comply with directive.* Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1786(k)(2)(A), the NCUA Board may assess a civil money penalty against any credit union that violates or otherwise fails to comply with any final directive issued under part 702 of this chapter, or against any institution-affiliated party of a credit union (per 12 U.S.C. 1786(r)) who participates in such violation or noncompliance.
( 2 ) *Failure to implement plan.* Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1786(k)(2)(A), the NCUA Board may assess a civil money penalty against a credit union which fails to implement a net worth restoration plan under subpart B of part 702 of this chapter or a revised business plan under subpart C of part 702, regardless whether the plan was published.
( c ) *Other enforcement action.* In addition to the actions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the NCUA Board may seek enforcement of the directives issued under part 702 of this chapter through any other judicial or administrative proceeding authorized by law.
[65 FR 8594, Feb. 18, 2000, as amended at 67 FR 71094, Nov. 29, 2002]
§ 1216.306 Actions normally requiring an environmental impact statement (EIS). ( a ) NASA shall prepare an EIS for actions that are likely to significantly impact the quality of the human environment, including actions for which an EA demonstrates that significant environmental impacts will potentially occur which will not be reduced or eliminated by changes to the proposed action or mitigation of its potentially significant environmental impacts. An EIS shall be prepared and published in accordance with CEQ's implementing regulations (40 CFR part 1502).
( b ) NASA actions normally requiring an EIS include: ( 1 ) Development and operation of new NASA-developed launch vehicles or space transportation systems.
( 2 ) Management, including recovery, transport, and curation, of sample returns to Earth from solar system bodies (such as asteroids, comets, planets, dwarf planets, and planetary moons) that would receive a Restricted Earth Return categorization. NASA requires such a mission to include additional measures to ensure any potential indigenous life form would be contained so it could not adversely impact humans or Earth's environment.
( 3 ) Substantial construction projects expected to result in significant effect(s) on the quality of the human and natural environment when such construction and its effects are not within the scope of an existing master plan.
[89 FR 25502, Apr. 11, 2024]
This map is intended for display purposes. No warranty is

made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the 

accuracy, reliability, or completeness of the data for individual

or aggregate use with other data, or for purposes not intended

by BLM. This map may not meet National Map Accuracy 

Standards. This product was developed through digital

means and information may be updated without notification.

Albers Equal Area, NAD83 Projection

Map generated by the Billings Field Office in July 2011

0 0.5 1 2 3 4

Miles

(

1 6 1 W

k

F

e

o

r

e

rk

C Rock

r C kcoR

kee Cr rae Bkeer C rae B

Wolf Creek

Maurice Creek

Se

Fork

el

No trh r

ey Creek

Sheridan

o uth F rk

Cr

So

31 eek

36 36 31 36 31

6

Grove Creek

1 1 6 1 6

keer C

ld

Go

Dilworth Creek

keer Cy ub R

North Line Creek

Line Creek

31

36 31 31 36

36

6

Route information and proposed management actions in this 

document only apply to Bureau of Land Management lands.

No route designations will be made on non-federal or private lands.

 The information on this map is developed from a variety of

 data sources and input scales may cause some misalignment of 

data layers. This map is for planning purposes only, and not 

intended for on-ground travel. 1:40,000

Wyoming

T

8

S

Custer

National Forest

T

9

S

72

R

re

e

vi

Fork Yellow

n

sto

rks

la

Montana R20E R21E C

Wyoming R103W R102W

T

58

N

Location Map

Legend

Montana

Billings 

Field 

Office

±

State Boundary

National Forest Boundary

Recommend Routes

Open to All Vehicles: 73 Miles

Roads

Lakes

Streams

Bureau of Land Management 

Division of State Lands

State Fish and Wildlife

Water

Public Lands Survey System

Private

Grove Creek Travel Management Area U.S. Forest Service

Grove Creek

Travel Management Area 

Alternative A

Map 147

Billings & Pompeys Pillar 

National Monument RMP / EIS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 19-40479

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Brandon Sanchez, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:18-CR-1122-1

Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Brandon Sanchez pleaded guilty to a drug crime. He timely filed a 

notice of appeal. His attorney later moved to withdraw under Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See also United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 

(5th Cir. 2011). Sanchez filed a pro se response objecting to his attorney’s 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 30, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 19-40479 Document: 00516260767 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/30/2022
No. 19-40479

2

motion to withdraw. We agree with defense counsel that there is no 

nonfrivolous basis for the appeal. 

We briefly address one question implicated in the briefing: whether 

the district court erred by including in the written judgment supervisedrelease conditions from the presentence report’s appendix and the district 

court’s standing orders, which contain a list of standard conditions. The 

answer is no. See United States v. Martinez, 15 F.4th 1179, 1180–81 (5th Cir. 

2021); United States v. Aguilar-Cerda, ___ F.4th ___, No. 20-10866, 2022 

WL 712810, at *1 (5th Cir. Mar. 10, 2022).

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, 

Sanchez’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, and the appeal 

is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 19-40479 Document: 00516260767 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/30/2022
§ 7.1022 National banks' authority to buy and sell exchange, coin, and bullion. ( a ) In this section, *industrial or commercial metal* means metal (including an alloy) in a physical form primarily suited to industrial or commercial use, for example, copper cathodes.
( b ) *Scope of authorization.* Section 24(Seventh) of the National Bank Act authorizes national banks to buy and sell exchange, coin, and bullion. Industrial or commercial metal is not exchange, coin, and bullion within the meaning of this authorization.
( c ) *Buying and selling metal as part of or incidental to the business of banking.* Section 24(Seventh) authorizes national banks to engage in activities that are part of, or incidental to, the business of banking. Buying and selling industrial or commercial metal for the purpose of dealing or investing in that metal is not part of or incidental to the business of banking pursuant to section 24(Seventh). Accordingly, national banks may not acquire industrial or commercial metal for purposes of dealing or investing.
( d ) *Other authorities not affected.* This section may not be construed to preclude a national bank from acquiring or selling metal in connection with its incidental authority to foreclose on loan collateral, compromise doubtful claims, or avoid loss in connection with a debt previously contracted. This section also may not be construed to preclude a national bank from buying and selling physical metal to hedge a derivative for which that metal is the reference asset so long as the amount of the physical metal used for hedging purposes is nominal.
( e ) *Nonconforming holdings.* National banks that hold industrial or commercial metal as a result of dealing or investing in that metal must dispose of such metal as soon as practicable, but not later than one year from April 1, 2018. The OCC may grant up to four separate one-year extensions to dispose of industrial or commercial metal if a national bank makes a good faith effort to dispose of the metal and retention of the metal for an additional year is not inconsistent with the safe and sound operation of the bank.
[81 FR 96360, Dec. 30, 2016, as amended at 85 FR 83729, Dec. 22, 2020]
#### Leon Fornel, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. Florida East Coast Railway Company, a Corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

Opinion Filed Feb. 4, 1913.

Per Curiam.

Upon the authority of the opinion this day filed in the case between the same parties the judgment herein is reversed.

Writ of error to the Circuit Court of Dade Countv.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

NESTOR RIVERA COLON,

Plaintiff(s),

MIGUEL A. TORRES DIAZ; WILLIAM

MIRANDA TORRES; HIGHWAY AND

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF

PUERTO RICO; MUNICIPALITY OF

CAGUAS; PUERTO RICO DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS,

LOCAL QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL

BOARD; JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF

PUERTO RICO; UNITED STATES

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY;

UNITED STATES DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF

PUERTO RICO,

Defendant(s).

Civil No. 15-1048 (DRD)

JUDGMENT

For the reasons set forth in the Opinion and Order of even date, Docket No. 60, this case is

dismissed without prejudice.

This case is now closed for all administrative and statistical purposes.

IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED.

In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 31st day of March, 2016.

 s/Daniel R. Domínguez

 DANIEL R. DOMINGUEZ

 United States District Judge 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24035-6 Filed:04/19/23 Entered:04/19/23 22:37:35 Desc: Case 3:15-cv-01048-DRD Document 61 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 1

Exhibit Page 1 of 1