alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30105]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11623]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP00-266-000]


TransColorado Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Tariff Filing

May 4, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 1, 2000, TransColorado Gas Transmission 
Company (TransColorado) tenders for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, Fourth Revised Sheet No. 247 and First 
Revised Sheet No. 247A, to be effective June 1, 2000.
    TransColorado states that the tariff sheets sets forth 
TransColorado's Fuel Gas Reimbursement Percentage (FGRP) calculation. 
The proposed tariff sheets revise the monthly variance calculations to 
state that the variance-adjustment component of the FGRP will be 
calculated on an annual basis instead of monthly.
    TransColorado stated that a copy of this filing has been served 
upon its customers, the New Mexico Public Utilities Commission and the 
Colorado Public Utilities Commission.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www. 
ferc.fed.us/online/ rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-11623 Filed 5-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### § 39.17 What must I do if a change in a product affects my ability to accomplish the actions required in an airworthiness directive?

If a change in a product affects your ability to accomplish the actions required by the airworthiness directive in any way, you must request FAA approval of an alternative method of compliance. Unless you can show the change eliminated the unsafe condition, your request should include the specific actions that you propose to address the unsafe condition. Submit your request in the manner described in § 39.19.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4309 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4309

  To amend the Community Services Block Grant Act to clarify that the 
      maximum allotment provision does not apply to supplemental 
                  appropriations for fiscal year 2020.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 23, 2020

 Mrs. Shaheen (for herself, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Barrasso, 
Ms. Hirono, Mr. Cramer, Ms. Cortez Masto, Mr. Sullivan, Ms. Hassan, Ms. 
 Rosen, and Mr. Hoeven) introduced the following bill; which was read 
 twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
                                Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Community Services Block Grant Act to clarify that the 
      maximum allotment provision does not apply to supplemental 
                  appropriations for fiscal year 2020.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Community Services Block Grant 
Refinement and Improvement Act''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON MAXIMUM ALLOTMENT REQUIREMENT.

    Section 675B(b)(3) of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 
U.S.C. 9906(b)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The 
reduction required by this paragraph shall not apply to any funds 
appropriated under the CARES Act or any subsequent supplemental 
appropriations bill for fiscal year 2020, including any such funds that 
remain available for another fiscal year.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### J. Field Kennard, Respondent, *v.*Frederick W. Ritter, as Executor of Maxwell H. Elliott, Deceased, et al., Appellants, Impleaded with Another.

Submitted January 18, 1937;

decided January 26, 1937.

*Frederick W. Ritter*for motion.

*George Dines*opposed.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements, on the ground the order is not final.
#### Kenneth L. GALLOWAY, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 15553.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued April 12, 1960.

Decided May 26, 1960.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia; Joseph R. Jackson, District Judge.

Mr. Caesar L. Aiello, Washington, D. C. (appointed by the District Court), for appellant.

Mr. Nathan J. Paulson, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before Edgerton, Wilbur K. Miller, and Washington, Circuit Judges.

*870PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from convictions of unauthorized use of two automobiles and grand larceny of the automobiles. Concurrent sentences were imposed on four counts. We find no error affecting substantial rights.

Affirmed.
#### § 414.5 Applicability.

This part applies to an applicant that wants to obtain a safety element approval for any of the safety elements defined under this part and to persons granted a safety element approval under this part. Any person eligible under this part may apply to become the holder of a safety element approval.
#### § 103.5 Waivers.

No person may conduct operations that require a deviation from this part except under a written waiver issued by the Administrator.
§ 385.34 Decision by the Reviewing Official. ( a ) *Decline of right to review.* If the Reviewing Official declines the right to exercise discretionary review, the staff action stayed by the petition for review shall become effective on the second business day following the date of service of the order, unless the order provides otherwise.
( b ) *Exercise of right to review.* The Reviewing Official will exercise his or her discretionary right of review either upon petition or on his or her own motion. The Reviewing official may by order provide for interlocutory relief pending his or her decision on the merits and may limit the issues on review. The Reviewing Official may affirm, modify or set aside the staff action, may order the matter remanded, or may order further submittals or other proceedings before making a decison on the merits. In case the Reviewing Official affirms the staff action, staff action stayed by the petition for review shall become effective on the second business day following the date of service of the Reviewing Official's order, unless the order provides otherwise. Decisions by the Reviewing Official under this part are final and are not subject to petitions for reconsideration.
[Doc. No. T-1, 49 FR 50985, Dec. 31, 1984; Amdt. 1, 50 FR 7170, Feb. 21, 1985. Redesignated by Doc. No. OST-96-1268, 61 FR 19171, May 1, 1996]
Order filed, February 15, 2018

.

In The 

## Court of Appeals

For The 

## First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01

- 18

- 00034

- CR

SCOTT RICHARD PENDERGRAFT , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

O n Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case 1512988



### ORDER The reporter’s record in this case was due February 9, 2018

. See Tex. R. App. P.

35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the reco rd. The

record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed

timely, we issue the following order.

We order, the official (or substitute) court reporter, to file the record in this appeal

, if any, within 30 days of the date of this order

.

PER CURIAM
§ 29.931 Shafting critical speed. ( a ) The critical speeds of any shafting must be determined by demonstration except that analytical methods may be used if reliable methods of analysis are available for the particular design.
( b ) If any critical speed lies within, or close to, the operating ranges for idling, power-on, and autorotative conditions, the stresses occurring at that speed must be within safe limits. This must be shown by tests.
( c ) If analytical methods are used and show that no critical speed lies within the permissible operating ranges, the margins between the calculated critical speeds and the limits of the allowable operating ranges must be adequate to allow for possible variations between the computed and actual values.
[Amdt. 29-12, 41 FR 55472, Dec. 20, 1976]
#### § 450.207 Human spaceflight requirements.

A licensee conducting a launch or reentry with a human being on board the vehicle must comply with human spaceflight requirements of part 460 of this chapter as specified in a license or license order.
* 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.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-50247 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. MARIA ADELA DAVALOS-HERNANDEZ Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-1730-ALL Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed torepresent Maria Adela Davalos-Hernandez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Davalos-Hernandez has moved to have other counsel appointed to represent her but has not specified any nonfrivolous basis for her appeal. Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and the motion by Davalos-Hernandez discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRA NTED, counsel is United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 25, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-50247

2 excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5T H C IR. R. 42.2. Davalos-Hernandez’s motion to appoint new counsel is DENIED.
§ 291.60 Public disclosure of data. ( a ) Detailed domestic on-flight market data and nonstop segment data, except military data, shall be made publicly available after processing. Domestic data are defined as data from air transportation operations from a place in any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, or a U.S. territory or possession to a place in any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, or a U.S. territory or possession. Domestic military operations are reported under service codes N or R.
( b ) Detailed international on-flight market and nonstop segment data in Schedule T-100 and Schedule T-100(f) reports, except military data, shall be publicly available immediately following the Department's determination that the database is complete, but no earlier than six months after the date of the data. Military operations are reported under service codes N or R. Data for on-flight markets and nonstop segments involving no U.S. points shall not be made publicly available for three years. Industry and carrier summary data may be made public before the end of six months or the end of three years, as applicable, provided there are three or more carriers in the summary data disclosed. The Department may, at any time, publish international summary statistics without carrier detail. Further, the Department may release nonstop segment and on-flight market detail data by carrier before the end of the confidentiality period as follows: ( 1 ) To foreign governments as provided in reciprocal arrangements between the foreign country and the U.S. Government for exchange of on-flight market and/or nonstop segment data submitted by air carriers of that foreign country and U.S. carriers serving that foreign country.
( 2 ) To parties to any proceeding before the Department under 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII (Transportation) as required by an Administrative Law Judge or other decision-maker of the Department. Parties may designate agents or consultants to receive the data in their behalf, provided the agents or consultants agree to abide by the disclosure restrictions. Any data to which access is granted pursuant to this provision may be introduced into evidence, subject to the normal rules of admissibility.
( 3 ) To agencies or other components of the U.S. Government for their internal use only.
[Doc. No. OST-98-4043, 67 FR 49230, July 30, 2002, as amended by DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15933, Apr. 16, 2019]
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23

- 10095 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus **Ponciano Delrio Rivera,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:20

- CR

- 492

- 2

**______________ ________________**  Before **Haynes, Graves,**  and **Duncan ,**  Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *****
The attorney appointed to represent Ponciano Delrio Rivera has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Delrio Rivera has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir**

**. R** 

**.** 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circu it 

### FILED July 17, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-10095 Document: 00516823398 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/17/2023No. 23

- 10095

2 concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is **DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 23-10095 Document: 00516823398 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/17/2023
Dismissed; Opinion Filed January 23, 2018.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-17-00720-CV

UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, PRATT & WHITNEY DIVISION D/B/A

PRATT & WHITNEY COMMERCIAL SERVICEABLE ASSETS, Appellant

V.

AERREACH AERO SPACE SOLUTIONS, LLC AND ROBERT V. HOGAN, 

INDIVIDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF TURBINE ASSET 

HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellees

On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-07714-M

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Bridges, Myers, and Schenck

Opinion by Justice Myers

Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion for dismissal of this appeal, filed January 4, 

2018. The parties inform the Court that they have settled. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 42.1(a), we grant the motion and dismiss this appeal.

170720F.P05

/Lana Myers/

LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

UNITED TECHNOLOGIES 

CORPORATION, PRATT & WHITNEY 

DIVISION D/B/A PRATT & WHITNEY 

COMMERCIAL SERVICEABLE ASSETS, 

Appellant

No. 05-17-00720-CV V.

AERREACH AERO SPACE SOLUTIONS, 

LLC AND ROBERT V. HOGAN, 

INDIVIDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY 

ON BEHALF OF TURBINE ASSET 

HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellees

On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-07714-M.

Opinion delivered by Justice Myers. Justices 

Bridges and Schenck participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that each party bear its own costs of this appeal.

Judgment entered this 23rd day of January, 2018.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 SpectraSite, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen H. Clark,
as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for the
purposes of 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.

May 8, 2003                                  /s/ STEPHEN H. CLARK
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                                 Stephen H. Clark
                                              Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                       EXHIBIT 8

                   SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES OF AMDOCS LIMITED

<Table>
<Caption>
                                       JURISDICTION OF
                                      INCORPORATION OR
     LIST OF THE SUBSIDIARIES           ORGANIZATION                  BUSINESS NAME
     ------------------------         ----------------                -------------
<S>                                  <C>                  <C>
Amdocs (Brazil) Limitada             Brazil               Amdocs (Brazil) Limitada

Amdocs Canada, Inc.                  Canada               Amdocs Canada, Inc.

Amdocs Holdings ULC                  Canada               Amdocs Holding ULC

Amdocs Canadian Managed Services,    Canada               Amdocs Canadian Managed Services, Inc.
  Inc. (f/k/a Certen Inc.)

Amdocs (Denmark) ApS                 Denmark              Amdocs (Denmark) ApS

Amdocs Software GmbH                 Germany              Amdocs Software GmbH

Amdocs Software Solutions Kft        Hungary              Amdocs Software Solutions Kft

Amdocs Development Centre India      India                Amdocs Development Centre India
  Private Limited                                         Private Limited

Amdocs Software Systems Ltd.         Ireland              Amdocs Software Systems Ltd.

European Software Marketing Ltd.     Island of Guernsey,  European Software Marketing Ltd.
                                     Channel Islands

Amdocs (Israel) Limited              Israel               Amdocs (Israel) Limited

Amdocs Development Limited           Republic of Cyprus   Amdocs Development Limited

Amdocs Champaign, Inc.               State of Delaware    Amdocs Champaign, Inc.

Amdocs, Inc.                         State of Delaware    Amdocs, Inc.

Amdocs Stamford, Inc.                State of Delaware    Amdocs Stamford, Inc.

Amdocs (USA), Inc.                   State of Delaware    Amdocs (USA), Inc.

Canadian Directory Technology Ltd.   State of Delaware    Canadian Directory Technology Ltd.

Sypress, Inc.                        State of Delaware    Sypress, Inc.

Amdocs Management Limited            United Kingdom       Amdocs Management Limited

Amdocs (UK) Limited                  United Kingdom       Amdocs (UK) Limited

European Support Limited             United Kingdom       European Support Limited

Directory Technology (Pty) Limited   Victoria, Australia  Directory Technology (Pty) Limited
</Table>
# EUR-Lex - 31995D0275 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31995D0275

**95/275/EC: Commission Decision of 10 July 1995 amending Commission Decision 94/777/EC laying down special conditions for the import of live bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates and marine gastropods originating in Turkey **

*
Official Journal L 167 , 18/07/1995 P. 0026 - 0027 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 10 July 1995 amending Commission Decision 94/777/EC laying down special conditions for the import of live bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates and marine gastropods originating in Turkey (Text with EEA relevance) (95/275/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 91/492/EEC of 15 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of live bivalve molluscs (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Article 9 thereof,

Whereas the list of establishments approved by Turkey for importing live bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates and marine gastropods into the Community has been drawn up in Commission Decision 94/777/EC (2); whereas this list may be amended following the communication of a new list by the competent authority in Turkey;

Whereas the competent authority in Turkey has communicated a new list adding three establishments;

Whereas it is necessary to amend the list of approved establishments;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Annex C of Decision 94/777/EC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 10 July 1995.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 268, 24. 9. 1991, p. 1.

(2) OJ No L 312, 6. 12. 1994, p. 35.

ANNEX

'ANNEX C

>TABLE>
#### § 375.24 Entry and clearance.

All U.S. entry and clearance requirements for aircraft, passengers, crews, baggage and cargo shall be followed.
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

**Certification**

 

The undersigned officer ofCapital Crossing Preferred Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies thatthe Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period endedSeptember 30, 2002 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  This certification is provided solelypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 
| Date:  November 8, 2002 | By: /s/ Edward  F. Mehm |                                     |
|-------------------------|-------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                    |                    | Edward F.  Mehm                          |
|                    |                    | Treasurer  (Principal Financial Officer) |
|                         |                         |                                          |  |

 

----