alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 24

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

             Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year Ended
                               December 31, 2000


The undersigned directors of the following companies (each respectively the
"Company")

                   Company                       State of Incorporation
                   -------                       ----------------------
 AEP Generating Company                                   Ohio
 Appalachian Power Company                              Virginia
 Central Power and Light Company                         Texas
 Columbus Southern Power Company                          Ohio
 Kentucky Power Company                                 Kentucky
 Ohio Power Company                                       Ohio
 Public Service Company of Oklahoma                     Oklahoma
 Southwestern Electric Power Company                    Delaware
 West Texas Utilities Company                            Texas

do hereby constitute and appoint E. LINN DRAPER, JR., ARMANDO A. PENA and
HENRY W. FAYNE, and each of them, their attorneys-in-fact and agents, to
execute for them, and in their names, and in any and all of their capacities,
the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K, pursuant to Section 13 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000,
and any and all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits
thereto and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and
each of them, full power and authority to do and perform every act and thing
required or necessary to be done, as fully to all intents and purposes as the
undersigned might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, may lawfully do or
cause to be done by virtue hereof.

      IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the undersigned have signed these presents this 28th
day of February, 2001.


   /s/ E. Linn Draper, Jr.                   /s/ Thomas V. Shockley, III
------------------------------------      --------------------------------------
E. Linn Draper, Jr.                       Thomas V. Shockley, III


   /s/ Henry W. Fayne                        /s/ Susan Tomasky
------------------------------------      --------------------------------------
Henry W. Fayne                            Susan Tomasky


   /s/ Wm. J. Lhota                          /s/ J. H. Vipperman
------------------------------------      --------------------------------------
Wm. J. Lhota                              J. H. Vipperman


   /s/ Armando A. Pena
------------------------------------
Armando A. Pena
§ 91.413 ATC transponder tests and inspections. ( a ) No persons may use an ATC transponder that is specified in 91.215(a), 121.345(c), or § 135.143(c) of this chapter unless, within the preceding 24 calendar months, the ATC transponder has been tested and inspected and found to comply with appendix F of part 43 of this chapter; and
( b ) Following any installation or maintenance on an ATC transponder where data correspondence error could be introduced, the integrated system has been tested, inspected, and found to comply with paragraph (c), appendix E, of part 43 of this chapter.
( c ) The tests and inspections specified in this section must be conducted by— ( 1 ) A certificated repair station properly equipped to perform those functions and holding— ( i ) A radio rating, Class III;
( ii ) A limited radio rating appropriate to the make and model transponder to be tested;
( iii ) A limited rating appropriate to the test to be performed;
( 2 ) A holder of a continuous airworthiness maintenance program as provided in part 121 or § 135.411(a)(2) of this chapter; or
( 3 ) The manufacturer of the aircraft on which the transponder to be tested is installed, if the transponder was installed by that manufacturer.
[Doc. No. 18334, 54 FR 34311, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91-267, 66 FR 21066, Apr. 27, 2001; Amdt. 91-269, 66 FR 41116, Aug. 6, 2001]
# EUR-Lex - 32000R0813 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32000R0813

**Council Regulation (EC) No 813/2000 of 17 April 2000 supplementing the Annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 on the registration of geographical indications and designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 **

*
Official Journal L 100 , 20/04/2000 P. 0005 - 0006 *

Council Regulation (EC) No 813/2000

of 17 April 2000

supplementing the Annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 on the registration of geographical indications and designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs(1), and in particular Article 17(2) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Additional information was requested on certain names notified by the Member States under Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 in order to ensure that they comply with Articles 2 and 4 of that Regulation. That additional information shows that the names do comply with those Articles. They should therefore be registered and added to the Annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96(2).

(2) The Committee provided for in Article 15 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 has not given a favourable opinion,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The names in the Annex to this Regulation are hereby added to the Annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Luxembourg, 17 April 2000.

For the Council

The President

L. Capoulas Santos

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1068/97 (OJ L 156, 13.6.1997, p. 10).

(2) OJ L 148, 21.6.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1070/1999 (OJ L 130, 26.5.1999, p. 18).

ANNEX

"OTHER PRODUCTS LISTED IN ANNEX I TO THE TREATY

Vinegars (other than wine vinegars)

ITALY

- Aceto balsamico tradizionale di Modena (PDO)

- Aceto balsamico tradizionale di Reggio Emilia (PDO)"
NO. 07-04-0518-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL D NOVEMBER 10, 2004

______________________________

JULIA MARTINEZ, Appellant
v. THE STA

TE OF TEX

AS, Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE 242nd DISTRICT COURT OF HAL E COUNTY; NO. B13405-9905; HON. ED SELF, PRESIDING

_______________________________ ON MOTION TO DISMISS

__________________________________ Before QUINN, REAVIS, and CAMPBELL, JJ. Appellant

Julia Martinez, by and through her attorney, has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal because she no l onger de sires to p rosecute it. Witho ut passin g on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to TexasRule of Appella te Proced ure 42.1(a)(2) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our manda te will issue forthwith.
Brian Quinn Justice Do not publish.
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 2- 38 05

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.
Mar k E. Bo wm an
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: May 28 , 20 13 Fil ed : M ay

31 , 20 13 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, BOW MAN, an d GRUENDER, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Mar k Bo wm an ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ni al of hi s 18 U.S.C. § 35 82 (c)( 2) 1

se nt en ce-r ed uc ti on m ot io n ba se d on Am en dm en t 75 0 to th e Uni te d St at es Sen te nc in g

The Hon or ab le Nan et te K. La u gh rey, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 W es te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.Gui de li ne s. W e co nc lu de th at Bo wm an was no t en ti tl ed to a red uc ti on ba se d on th e

a mend m en t, as th e se nt en ce he rece iv ed in 20 06 was th e st at ut or y m an da to ry
m in im um

. See Uni te d St at es v. Pet e r s , 5 2 4 F

. 3d 90 5, 90 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ) (p er
cu ria m ). Fu rth er, co un se l’s a r g u men t on ap pe al th at Bo wm an sh ou ld rece iv e th e be ne fit of th e st at u t o ry ch an ge s of th e Fai r Sen te nc in g Act of 20 10 (FSA) fai ls be cau se , am on g ot he r reas on s, we ha ve he ld th at th e FSA do es no t ap pl y to de fen da nt s who w e r e s e n t e n ced pr io r to it s Aug us t 3, 20 10 en act m en t. See Uni te d St at es v. Brewe r, 62 4 F.3 d 90 0, 90 9 n.7 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ); cf. Dor se y v. Uni te d St at es , 13 2 S. Ct

. 23 21 , 23 35 (2 01 2) (FSA ap pl ie s to de fen da n t s who co m m it te d th ei r of fen se s b efo re t he FSA’s effe ct iv e d at e b ut were s en te nc ed aft er t ha t d at e).

Acco rd in gl y , th e jud gm en t is affi rm ed

. Co un se l’s m ot io n to wit hd ra w is gr an te d.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2

-
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 97 (Thursday, May 18, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12256]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00-322; MM Docket No. 98-112; RM-9027; RM-9268; RM-9384]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Anniston and Ashland, AL, and 
College Park, GA

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: At the request of WNNX License Investment Company this 
document substitutes Channel 263C3 for Channel 263C at Anniston, 
Alabama, reallots Channel 263C3 to College Park, Georgia, and modifies 
the license of Station WHMA to specify operation on Channel 263C3 at 
College Park. In addition, this document allots Channel 261C3 to 
Anniston, Alabama, and Channel 264A to Ashland, Alabama. See 63 FR 
38787, published July 20, 1998. The reference coordinates for Channel 
263C3 at College Park, Georgia, are 33-45-32 and 84-30-10. The 
reference coordinates for Channel 261C3 at Anniston, Alabama, are 33-
40-51 and 85-48-56. The reference coordinates for Channel 264A at 
Ashland, Alabama, are 33-13-15 and 85-49-35. With this action, the 
proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective June 14, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Hayne, Mass Media Bureau (202) 
418-2177.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order in MM Docket No. 98-112, adopted April 24, 2000, and 
released April 28, 2000. The full text of this decision is available 
for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's 
Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street, 
SW, Washington, D.C. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW, 
Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Alabama, is 
amended by removing Channel 263C and adding Channel 261C3 at Anniston.
    3. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Alabama, is 
amended by adding Channel 264A, at Ashland.

    4. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Georgia, is 
amended by adding College Park, Channel 263C3.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-12256 Filed 5-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
§ 1912.36 Advice of advisory committees. ( a ) Approval by a majority of all members of an advisory committee is encouraged for rendering advice or making recommendations. However, a failure to marshal a majority of all members of an advisory committee shall not be a reason for not giving advice to the Assistant Secretary. The Assistant Secretary shall be informed of any concurring or dissenting views.
( b ) An advisory committee shall submit to the Assistant Secretary its recommendations within 90 days from the date of its commencement of its assigned tasks, or within such longer or shorter period otherwise prescribed by the Assistant Secretary or one of his representatives. If a committee believes that it cannot submit its recommendations within the applicable period, its chairman may make a written request for an extension of time to the Director of the Office of Standards, before the expiration of the period. The Director of the Office of Standards may grant such a request, provided that the period of the extension or extensions, together with the original period for the submission of recommendations, is not longer than 270 days from the date the advisory committee commenced its assigned tasks.
( c ) In a case where an advisory committee has not submitted its recommendations by the end of the applicable period therefor, the Assistant Secretary may dissolve the committee and direct the immediate transmittal to him of any materials submitted to, or prepared by, the advisory committee.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS (LOSS) AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE
SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           9,107
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,997
<ALLOWANCES>                                       287
<INVENTORY>                                     14,736
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,584
<PP&E>                                          99,148
<DEPRECIATION>                                  60,258
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  85,526
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,895
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      9,748
<COMMON>                                         2,113
<OTHER-SE>                                     (8,559)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    85,526
<SALES>                                        107,369
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               107,369
<CGS>                                           83,064
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   83,064
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                37,027
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,703
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,425)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,837
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (24,262)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   1,969
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (22,293)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (5.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (5.88)


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-41525

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MOISES ALBERTO MUNOZ-SAULA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-03-CR-1021-1

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

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Moises Alberto Munoz-Saula appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Munoz-Saula contends that the “felony” and “aggravated felony”

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. 

He therefore argues that his conviction must be reduced to one

under the lesser included offense found in 8 U.S.C. § 1362(a),

his judgment must be reformed to reflect a conviction only under

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 23, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 03-41525

-2-

that provision, and his sentence must be vacated and the case

remanded for resentencing to no more than two years’ imprisonment

and one year of supervised release. 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Munoz-Saula acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 92 (Thursday, May 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30452]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11857]


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

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD


Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) has submitted 
the following proposal(s) for the collection of information to the 
Office of Management and budget for review and approval.

Summary of Proposals

    (1) Collection title: Employment Deemed Service Month 
Questionnaire.
    (2)Form(s) submitted: GL-99.
    (3) OMB Number: 3220-0156.
    (4) Expiration date of current OMB clearance: 6/30/2000.
    (5) Type of request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    (6) Respondents: Business or other-for-profit.
    (7) Estimated annual number of respondents: 150.
    (8) Total annual responses: 4,000.
    (9) Total annual reporting hours: 133.
    (10) Collection description: Under Section 3(i) of the Railroad 
Retirement Act, the Railroad Retirement Board may deem months of 
service in cases where an employee does not actually work in every 
month of the year. The collection obtains service and compensation 
information from railroad employers needed to determine if an employee 
may be credited with additional months of railroad service.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the forms and supporting 
documents can be obtained from Chuck Mierzwa, the agency clearance 
officer (312-751-3363). Comments regarding the information collection 
should be addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 
North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 and the OMB reviewer, 
Joe Lackey (202-395-7316), Office of management and Budget, Room 10230, 
New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.

Chuck Mierzwa,
Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-11857 Filed 5-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7905-01-M
#### § 1608.9 Reliance on directions of other government agencies.

When a charge challenges an affirmative action plan or program, or when such a plan or program is raised as justification for an employment decision, and when the plan or program was developed pursuant to the requirements of a Federal or State law or regulation which in part seeks to ensure equal employment opportunity, the Commission will process the charge in accordance with § 1608.10(a). Other agencies with equal employment opportunity responsibilities may apply the principles of these Guidelines in the exercise of their authority.
Comment Info: ================= General Comment:? U.S. DOT/FAA - Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ 1603.304 Commission decision. ( a ) On behalf of the Commission, the Office of Federal Operations shall review the record and the appellate briefs submitted by all the parties. The Office of Federal Operations shall prepare a recommended decision for consideration by the Commission.
( b ) When an administrative law judge certifies a matter for interlocutory review under § 1603.213, the Commission may, in its discretion, issue a decision on the matter or send the matter back to the administrative law judge without decision.
( c ) The Commission will not accept or consider new evidence on appeal unless the Commission, in its discretion, reopens the record on appeal.
( d ) The decision of the Commission on appeal shall be its final order and shall be served on all parties.
( e ) In the absence of a timely appeal under § 1603.302, the decision of the administrative law judge under § 1603.217 or a dismissal under § 1603.107 shall become the final order of the Commission. A final order under this paragraph shall not have precedential significance.