alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001073363
<NAME> AEI INCOME & GROWTH FUND 23 LLC

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       3,382,776
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,990
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,387,766
<PP&E>                                         699,516
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,087,282
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          177,979
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,909,303
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,087,282
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                43,202
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   41,517
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,685
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,685
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,685
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45



</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-04-00619-CR

Stephen Clifton Wallace, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. 649520, HONORABLE DAVID F. CRAIN, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Stephen Clifton Wallace pleaded no contest to an information accusing him

of using a forged or altered prescription to obtain a dangerous drug. See Tex. Health & Safety Code

Ann. § 483.045 (West 2003). The court adjudged appellant guilty and sentenced him to 180 days

in jail and a $2000 fine, but the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on

community supervision.

In his only point of error, appellant contends that his plea was involuntary because

he was not advised of the consequences this conviction could have in other prosecutions said to be

pending against him. None of the facts relied on in support of this claim are shown by the record.

The record does contain documents reflecting that appellant was represented by counsel, advised of
 There is no reporter’s record, except for the record of a hearing ordered by this Court after 1

appellate counsel failed to file a brief. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b). 

2

the consequences of a plea of guilty or no contest, and “aware of the consequences of my plea.”1

Moreover, the only adverse consequence specifically mentioned in appellant’s brief, the impeaching

effect of this conviction should appellant testify in a later proceeding, is a collateral consequence,

ignorance of which does not render a guilty plea involuntary. See Ex parte Morrow, 952 S.W.2d

530, 536 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); see also Jackson v. State, 139 S.W.3d 7, 17 (Tex. App.—Fort

Worth 2004, pet. ref’d).

The point of error is overruled and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________

W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson and Puryear

Affirmed

Filed: September 22, 2005

Do Not Publish
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4853 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

3519 East Walnut Street in Pearland, Texas, as the ‘‘Tom Reid Post 

Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 23 (legislative day, OCTOBER 19), 2020 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. CRUZ) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 3519 East Walnut Street in Pearland, Texas, 

as the ‘‘Tom Reid Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. TOM REID POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 3519 East Walnut Street in 

6 Pearland, Texas, shall be known and designated as the 

7 ‘‘Tom Reid Post Office Building’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4853 IS

1 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Tom Reid Post Office 

3 Building’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
§ 93.177 Operations in the Special Air Traffic Rule Area. ( a ) Unless otherwise authorized by Air Traffic Control (ATC), no person may operate an aircraft in flight within the Luke Terminal Area designated in § 93.176 unless— ( 1 ) Before operating within the Luke Terminal area, that person establishes radio contact with the Luke RAPCON; and
( 2 ) That person maintains two-way radio communication with the Luke RAPCON or an appropriate ATC facility while within the designated area.
( b ) Requests for deviation from the provisions of this section apply only to aircraft not equipped with an operational radio. The request must be submitted at least 24 hours before the proposed operation to Luke RAPCON.
EXHIBIT 32.2





SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



I, David O. Cole, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the periodic report, to which this Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the periodic report to which this Statement is attached, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.



A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC upon request.







Date:  July 20, 2009

By:/s/ David O. Cole

David O. Cole

Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12267]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP00-274-000]


Reliant Energy Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

May 11, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 8, 2000, Reliant Energy Gas Transmission 
Company (REGT), tendered for filing the following pro forma tariff 
sheets:

Pro Forma Second Revised Sheet No. 1
Pro Forma First Revised Sheet No. 59
Pro Forma Original Sheet No. 70
Pro Forma Original Sheet No. 71
Pro Forma Original Sheet No. 72
Pro Forma Original Sheet No. 73
Pro Forma Original Sheet No. 74
Pro Forma Original Sheet No. 75
Pro Forma First Revised Sheet No. 286
Pro Forma Second Revised Sheet No. 289
Pro Forma Revised Sheet No. 290

    REGT states that these tariff sheets would institute Rate Schedule 
ANS to provide automatic nomination (AutoNom) service. REGT has 
requested that the Commission review this filing in a manner that will 
permit Rate Schedule ANS to become effective on July 1, 2000.
    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. 00-12267 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
**Exhibit 32.2**

**Certificationof Principal Financial Officer**

**Requiredby Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b)**

**ofthe Exchange Act**

       Inconnection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Advanstar Communications Inc.(the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Theodore S. Alpert, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| By:    | /s/ Ted S. Alpert       |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Theodore S. Alpert      |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |
|   |                    |
| Date:  | April 2, 2007           |

 

----
#### § 18.603 Oath or affirmation.

Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken the witness' conscience and impress the witness' mind with the duty to do so.
#### § 18.20 Parties to a proceeding.

A party seeking original relief or action is designated a complainant, claimant or plaintiff, as appropriate. A party against whom relief or other action is sought is designated a respondent or defendant, as appropriate. When participating in a proceeding, the applicable Department of Labor's agency is a party or party-in-interest.
EXHIBIT 32





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 Intelligent Living Corp. (formerly Elgrande.com, Inc.) (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael F. Holloran, Chief Executive Officer and Principal 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 to the best of my knowledge: (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.



DATED:

April 19, 2010

/s/ Michael F. Holloran

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

Michael F. Holloran;

Chief Executive Officer and

Principal Financial Officer
§ 15.206 What claims arising at a residence or Telework location may be covered under the MPCECA? ( a ) Claims arising at a residence, Telework center or other flexiplace location may be covered under the MPCECA.
( b ) For the purpose of this subpart, residence means a house, apartment or other location that is a Department employee's principal abode.
( c ) Claims for property damage at an alternative work location at which the employee is performing duties pursuant to an approved Telework agreement may be covered by the MPCECA if the property was being used incident to service with the Department, as, for the purposes of this subpart, that location is considered to be an official duty station. Under most circumstances, property damage will only be allowed if it occurs at or in connection with the employee's workstation.
( d ) Claims under the MPCECA at a residence not covered by paragraph (c) of this section may be allowable for damage to, or loss of, property arising from fire, flood, hurricane, other natural disaster, theft, or other unusual occurrence, if the property was being used incident to service with the Department, while such property is located at: ( 1 ) Residences within the 50 States or the District of Columbia that were assigned to the claimant or otherwise provided in kind by the United States; or
( 2 ) Residences outside the 50 States and the District of Columbia that were occupied by the claimant, whether or not they were assigned or otherwise provided in kind by the United States, except when the claimant is a civilian employee who is a local inhabitant; or
( 3 ) Any warehouse, office, working area or other place (except residences) authorized or apparently authorized for the reception or storage of property.
NUMBER 13-21-00229-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

IN THE INTEREST OF A.D.A., A CHILD

 

On appeal from the 430th District Court 

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

 

ORDER

Before Justices Longoria, Hinojosa, and Tijerina

Order Per Curiam

This cause is before the Court on appellant’s amended motion to stay time to file 

appellant’s brief, which we construe as a motion for an extension of time to file appellant’s 

brief. Appellant’s brief is currently due on September 7, 2021. Appellant’s counsel has 

informed the court that she intends to file a supplemental reporter’s record and that “the 

failure to timely designate the entire reporter’s record was due to no fault of [appellant.]” 
2

The Court, having fully examined and considered appellant’s motion is of the 

opinion that the motion should be granted. The Court, however, requires strict adherence 

to the briefing rules in appeals of parental termination cases, such as this appeal, and 

looks with disfavor upon the delay caused by such extension requests. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 38.6; see also id. at R. 28.4.

It is therefore ordered that the Honorable Victoria Guerra, counsel for appellant, 

file the appellate brief with this Court by the earlier of twenty days following the filing of 

the supplemental reporter’s record or October 1, 2021. Further motions for extension of 

time will not be favorably entertained by this Court, absent extraordinary circumstances.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the

1st day of September, 2021.
§ 1472.215 What must I include in my drug-free awareness program? You must establish an ongoing drug-free awareness program to inform employees about— ( a ) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
( b ) Your policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;
( c ) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and
( d ) The penalties that you may impose upon them for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace.
§ 1915.173 Drums and containers. ( a ) Shipping drums and containers shall not be pressurized to remove their contents.
( b ) A temporarily assembled pressurized piping system conveying hazardous liquids or gases shall be provided with a relief valve and by-pass to prevent rupture of the system and the escape of such hazardous liquids or gases.
( c ) Pressure vessels, drums and containers containing toxic or flammable liquids or gases shall not be stored or used where they are subject to open flame, hot metal, or other sources of artificial heat.
( d ) Unless pressure vessels, drums and containers of 30 gallon capacity or over containing flammable or toxic liquids or gases are placed in an out-of-the-way area where they will not be subject to physical injury from an outside source, barriers or guards shall be erected to protect them from such physical injury.
( e ) Containers of 55 gallons or more capacity containing flammable or toxic liquid shall be surrounded by dikes or pans which enclose a volume equal to at least 35 percent of the total volume of the containers.
( f ) Fire extinguishers adequate in number and suitable for the hazard shall be provided. These extinguishers shall be located in the immediate area where pressure vessels, drums and containers containing flammable liquids or gases are stored or in use. Such extinguishers shall be ready for use at all times.
§ 1606.7 Speak-English-only rules. ( a ) *When applied at all times.* A rule requiring employees to speak only English at all times in the workplace is a burdensome term and condition of employment. The primary language of an individual is often an essential national origin characteristic. Prohibiting employees at all times, in the workplace, from speaking their primary language or the language they speak most comfortably, disadvantages an individual's employment opportunities on the basis of national origin. It may also create an atmosphere of inferiority, isolation and intimidation based on national origin which could result in a discriminatory working environment.[7] Therefore, the Commission will presume that such a rule violates title VII and will closely scrutinize it.
( b ) *When applied only at certain times.* An employer may have a rule requiring that employees speak only in English at certain times where the employer can show that the rule is justified by business necessity.
( c ) *Notice of the rule.* It is common for individuals whose primary language is not English to inadvertently change from speaking English to speaking their primary language. Therefore, if an employer believes it has a business necessity for a speak-English-only rule at certain times, the employer should inform its employees of the general circumstances when speaking only in English is required and of the consequences of violating the rule. If an employer fails to effectively notify its employees of the rule and makes an adverse employment decision against an individual based on a violation of the rule, the Commission will consider the employer's application of the rule as evidence of discrimination on the basis of national origin.
Footnotes -
1606.7
[7] See CD 71-446 (1970), CCH EEOC Decisions ¶ 6173, 2 FEP Cases, 1127; CD 72-0281 (1971), CCH EEOC Decisions ¶ 6293.
§ 102.48 No exceptions filed; exceptions filed; motions for reconsideration, rehearing, or reopening the record. ( a ) *No exceptions filed.* If no timely or proper exceptions are filed, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations contained in the Administrative Law Judge's decision will, pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Act, automatically become the decision and order of the Board and become its findings, conclusions, and order, and all objections and exceptions must be deemed waived for all purposes.
( b ) *Exceptions filed.* ( 1 ) Upon the filing of timely and proper exceptions, and any cross-exceptions or answering briefs, as provided in § 102.46, the Board may decide the matter upon the record, or after oral argument, or may reopen the record and receive further evidence before a Board Member or other Board agent or agency, or otherwise dispose of the case.
( 2 ) Where exception is taken to a factual finding of the Administrative Law Judge, the Board, in determining whether the finding is contrary to a preponderance of the evidence, may limit its consideration to such portions of the record as are specified in the exceptions, the supporting brief, and the answering brief.
( c ) *Motions for reconsideration, rehearing, or reopening the record.* A party to a proceeding before the Board may, because of extraordinary circumstances, move for reconsideration, rehearing, or reopening of the record after the Board decision or order. ( 1 ) A motion for reconsideration must state with particularity the material error claimed and with respect to any finding of material fact, must specify the page of the record relied on. A motion for rehearing must specify the error alleged to require a hearing de novo and the prejudice to the movant from the error. A motion to reopen the record must state briefly the additional evidence sought to be adduced, why it was not presented previously, and that, if adduced and credited, it would require a different result. Only newly discovered evidence, evidence which has become available only since the close of the hearing, or evidence which the Board believes may have been taken at the hearing will be taken at any further hearing.
( 2 ) Any motion pursuant to this section must be filed within 28 days, or such further period as the Board may allow, after the service of the Board's decision or order, except that a motion to reopen the record must be filed promptly on discovery of the evidence to be adduced.
( 3 ) The filing and pendency of a motion under this provision will not stay the effectiveness of the action of the Board unless so ordered. A motion for reconsideration or rehearing need not be filed to exhaust administrative remedies.
• 

Regulatory Evaluation 

Docket No. F AA-20 12-0004 Directorate Identifier: 20 12-NE -0 l-AD 

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell. 

Estimated Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g. , aircraft, engine, 

(e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include co~ t (labor + u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

On-wing inspection 4.5 0 

Shop inspection 4.0 i 0 

' 

I 

.. 

The known number of products in com pi iance: 

Tota l Costs of compl iance for U.S. fleet: $ 0 

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $ 

On-Condition Costs: ~ 

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

replacement) testing, and closeup) 

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): 

7
#### § 1472.515 Are there any exceptions to those actions?

The Agency Director may waive with respect to a particular award, in writing, a suspension of payments under an award, suspension or termination of an award, or suspension or debarment of a recipient if the Agency Director determines that such a waiver would be in the public interest. This exception authority cannot be delegated to any other official.