alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 99 (Monday, May 22, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 32135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12689]


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

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee; Open Committee 
Meetings

    According to the provisions of section 10 of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), notice is hereby given that meetings of 
the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee will be held on--

Thursday, May 25, 2000
Thursday, June 8, 2000
Thursday, June 22, 2000

    The meetings will start at 10 a.m. and will be held in Room 5A06A, 
Office of Personnel Management Building, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, 
DC.
    The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee is composed of a 
Chair, five representatives from labor unions holding exclusive 
bargaining rights for Federal blue-collar employees, and five 
representatives from Federal agencies. Entitlement to membership on the 
Committee is provided for in 5 U.S.C. 5347.
    The Committee's primary responsibility is to review the Prevailing 
Rate System and other matters pertinent to establishing prevailing 
rates under subchapter IV, chapter 53, 5 U.S.C., as amended, and from 
time to time advise the Office of Personnel Management.
    This scheduled meeting will start in open session with both labor 
and management representatives attending. During the meeting either the 
labor members or the management members may caucus separately with the 
Chair to devise strategy and formulate positions. Premature disclosure 
of the matters discussed in these caucuses would unacceptably impair 
the ability of the Committee to reach a consensus on the matters being 
considered and would disrupt substantially the disposition of its 
business. Therefore, these caucuses will be closed to the public 
because of a determination made by the Director of the Office of 
Personnel Management under the provisions of section 10(d) of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and 5 U.S.C. 
552b(c)(9)(B). These caucuses may, depending on the issues involved, 
constitute a substantial portion of a meeting.
    Annually, the Chair compiles a report of pay issues discussed and 
concluded recommendations. These reports are available to the public, 
upon written request to the Committee's Secretary.
    The public is invited to submit material in writing to the Chair on 
Federal Wage System pay matters felt to be deserving of the Committee's 
attention. Additional information on this meeting may be obtained by 
contacting the Committee's Secretary, Office of Personnel Management, 
Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee, Room 5559, 1900 E Street 
NW, Washington, DC 20415; (202) 606-1500.

    Dated: May 10, 2000.
John F. Leyden,
Chairman, Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 00-12689 Filed 5-19-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-P
## NUMBER 13

- 2 1

- 00 229

- C V

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

IN THE INTER EST OF A.D.A., A CHILD

On appeal from the 430 th District Court

of Hidalgo C ounty, 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. A ppellant ’ 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 T EX

. R. A PP

.

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

1 s t day of September, 2021.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000059591
<NAME> LINDAL CEDAR HOMES, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           4,038
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,102
<ALLOWANCES>                                       394
<INVENTORY>                                     10,689
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,732
<PP&E>                                          19,261
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,432
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,034
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,918
<BONDS>                                          1,164
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            41
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,701
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,034
<SALES>                                         46,635
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                46,635
<CGS>                                           35,755
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   35,755
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   205
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 133
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,168
<INCOME-TAX>                                       662
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,506
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,506
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .37


</TABLE>
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 50425 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JOSE RAFAEL CARPIO-NATIVIDAD,
Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:15 -CR- 27 -1

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after removal, Jose Rafael Carpio -Natividad was sentenced within the recommended guidelines range to 24 months of imprisonment. Carpio-Natividad argues that the district
court erred by convicting, sentencing, and entering judgment against him pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based upon its determination that his 2014 conviction for assault/family violence in violation of Texas Penal Code

* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 4, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-50425 Document: 00513820924 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/04/2017No. 15

- 50425

2 § 22.0 1(b)(2)(A) was a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16 and thus was an aggravated felony u nder 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F). Relying primarily on
Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), h e argues that the definition of a crime of violence in Section 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague on its face. He further contends that this court cannot apply Section 16(b) in this case without violating due process. 1 The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance, urging that Carpio-Natividad’s challenge to Section 16(b) is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Gonzalez -Longoria , 831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), petition for cert. filed (Sept. 29, 2016) (No. 16

- 6259). The Government is correct that Gonzalez-Longoria forecloses CarpioNatividad’s facial chall enge to Section 16(b) as well as, in this case, an as

applied c hallenge to Section 16(b)

. 2 See id. Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternate motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.

1 Carpio

- Natividad also argues that his Texas assault/family violence conviction is not a crime of violence under Section 16(a). We need not reach this issue given that the conviction qualifie s as a crime of violence under Section 16(b).

2 The recent grant of certiorari by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of whether Section 16(b) is unconstitutional in light of Johnson in Lynch v. Dimaya , 137 S. Ct. 31 ( 2016 ), does not alter the analysis. This court is bound by its own precedent unless and until that precedent is altered by a decision of the Supreme Court. See Wicker v. McCotter , 798 F.2d 155, 157

– 58 (5th Cir. 1986)

. Case: 15-50425 Document: 00513820924 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/04/2017
71°30'

71°30'

71°37'30"

71°37'30"

42°7'30" 42°7'30"

42°0' 42°0'

SCALE 1:24,000

BLACKSTONE QUADRANGLE

1 0.5 0 1 MILES

1 0.5 0 1 KILOMETERS

Stone, B.D., Stone, J.R., and DiGiacomo-Cohen, M.L., 2008, Surficial

geologic map of the Worcester North-Oxford-Wrentham-Attleboro

nine-quadrangle area in south-central Massachusetts: U.S. Geological

Survey Open-File Report 2006-1260-D.

Available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1260/D.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

OFFICE OF THE STATE GEOLOGIST

AND EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS

Prepared in cooperation with the OPEN-FILE REPORT 2006-1260-D

Explanatory pamphlet accompanies map

Surficial Geologic Map of the Blackstone Quadrangle, Massachusetts

Compiled by

Byron D. Stone, Janet R. Stone, and Mary L. DiGiacomo-Cohen

2008

Base from U.S. Geological Survey, 1969.

Map was scanned, processed, georeferenced,

rectified, and cropped by the Office of the

Massachusetts State Geologist. Image available online at:

http://www.geo.umass.edu/stategeologist/frame_maps.htm

Geology mapped by G.M. Haselton and E. Fontaine in

1982. Bedrock outcrops in the northern portion of the

quadrangle mapped by C.E. Shaw, Jr. in 1966. Bedrock

outcrops in the southern portion of the quadrangle

mapped by McKniff, J.M. (1964). Additional outcrops

from Richard Goldsmith. Some postglacial units mapped

using 2005 orthophoto images.

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

(SHEET 5 of 8)

(MILFORD)

(GEORGIAVILLE)

(UXB

RID

G

E)

(FRA

N

KLIN)
§ 2200.92 Review by the Commission. ( a ) *Jurisdiction of the Commission; issues on review.* Unless the Commission orders otherwise, a direction for review establishes jurisdiction in the Commission to review the entire case. The issues to be decided on review are within the discretion of the Commission.
( b ) *Review on a Commissioner's motion; issues on review.* At any time within 30 days after the docketing date of the Judge's report, a Commissioner may, on the Commissioner's own motion, direct that a Judge's decision be reviewed. Factors that may be considered in deciding whether to direct review absent a petition include, but are not limited to, whether the case raises novel questions of law or policy or involves a conflict between Administrative Law Judges' decisions. When a Commissioner directs review on the Commissioner's own motion, the issues ordinarily will be those specified in the direction for review or any later order.
( c ) *Issues not raised before Judge.* The Commission will ordinarily not review issues that the Judge did not have the opportunity to pass upon. In exercising discretion to review issues that the Judge did not have the opportunity to pass upon, the Commission may consider such factors as whether there was good cause for not raising the issue before the Judge, the degree to which the issue is factual, the degree to which proceedings will be disrupted or delayed by raising the issue on review, whether the ability of an adverse party to press a claim or defense would be impaired, and whether considering the new issue would avoid injustice or ensure that judgment will be rendered in accordance with the law and facts.
Exhibit 24.05


POWER OF ATTORNEY


     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned Director and/or
officer of Kinark Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), hereby
constitutes and appoints Paul R. Chastain the true and lawful agent and
attorney-in-fact of the undersigned with full power of substitution and
authority to sign for the undersigned, as Director or an officer of the
Company, or as both, the Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the period ended
December 31, 1996, and any and all exhibits and amendments thereto to be filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C. pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; hereby
ratifying and confirming all acts taken by such agent and attorney-in-fact as
herein authorized.

                              DATED:  March 25, 1997.

                              /s/ John H. Sununu 
                                   John H. Sununu
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 98 (Friday, May 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31916]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12588]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHS Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than June 12, 2000.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Phillip Jackson, Applications 
Officer) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Antioch Holding Company, Antioch, Illinois; to acquire 24.99 
percent of the voting shares of Lakes Region Bancorp, Inc, Third Lake, 
Illinois, and thereby indirectly acquire Anchor Bank, Third Lake, 
Illinois.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Randall C. Sumner, Vice 
President) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034;
    1. Valley Capital Corporation, Greenwood, Mississippi; to merge 
with State Capital Corporation, Brookhaven, Mississippi, and thereby 
indirectly acquire State Bank and Trust Company, Brookhaven, 
Mississippi.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 15, 2000.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 00-12588 Filed 5-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
§ 1471.310 What must I do if a Federal agency excludes a person with whom I am already doing business in a covered transaction? ( a ) You as a participant may continue covered transactions with an excluded person if the transactions were in existence when the agency excluded the person. However, you are not required to continue the transactions, and you may consider termination. You should make a decision about whether to terminate and the type of termination action, if any, only after a thorough review to ensure that the action is proper and appropriate.
( b ) You may not renew or extend covered transactions (other than no-cost time extensions) with any excluded person, unless the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service grants an exception under § 1471.120.
#### § 1910.108 [Reserved]
#### § 1980.113 Judicial enforcement.

Whenever any person has failed to comply with a preliminary order of reinstatement, or a final order, including one approving a settlement agreement, issued under the Act, the Secretary may file a civil action seeking enforcement of the order in the United States district court for the district in which the violation was found to have occurred. Whenever any person has failed to comply with a preliminary order of reinstatement, or a final order, including one approving a settlement agreement, issued under the Act, a person on whose behalf the order was issued may file a civil action seeking enforcement of the order in the appropriate United States district court.
#### INDUST COMM v MARSH

Ohio Supreme Court

No 21727.

Decided Dec. 24, 1929

Marshall, CJ.,Jjtobinson, Jones, Matthias, Day and Allen, JJ., concur.
§ 1917.48 Conveyors. ( a ) *Guards.* ( 1 ) Danger zones at or adjacent to conveyors shall be guarded to protect employees.
( 2 ) An elevated walkway with guardrail or equivalent means of protection shall be provided where employees cross over moving conveyors, and suitable guarding shall be provided when employees pass under moving conveyors.
( b ) *Moving parts.* Conveyor rollers and wheels shall be secured in position.
( c ) *Positioning.* Gravity conveyor sections shall be firmly placed and secured to prevent them from falling.
( d ) *Braking.* ( 1 ) When necessary for safe operation, provisions shall be made for braking objects at the delivery end of the conveyor.
( 2 ) Conveyors using electrically released brakes shall be constructed so that the brakes cannot be released until power is applied, and so that the brakes are automatically engaged if the power fails or the operating control is returned to the “stop” position.
( e ) *Stability.* Portable conveyors shall be stable within their operating ranges. When used at variable fixed levels, the unit shall be secured at the operating level.
( f ) *Emergency stop devices.* Readily accessible stop controls shall be provided for use in an emergency. Whenever the operation of any power conveyor requires personnel to work in the immediate vicinity of the conveyor, the Conveyor or controls shall not be left unattended while the conveyor is in operation.
( g ) *Starting powered conveyors.* Powered conveyors shall not be started until all employees are clear of the conveyor or have been warned that the conveyor is about to start.
( h ) *Loading and unloading.* The area around conveyor loading and unloading points shall be kept clear of obstructions during conveyor operations.
( i ) *Lockout/Tagout.* ( 1 ) Conveyors shall be stopped and their power sources locked out and tagged out during maintenance, repair, and servicing, unless power is necessary for testing.
( 2 ) The starting device shall be locked out and tagged out in the stop position before an attempt is made to remove the cause of a jam or overload of the conveying medium, unless it is necessary to have the power on to remove the jam.
( j ) *Safe practices.* ( 1 ) Only designated persons shall operate, repair or service powered conveyors.
( 2 ) The employer shall direct employees to stay off operating conveyors.
( 3 ) Conveyors shall be operated only with all overload devices, guards and safety devices in place and operable.
[48 FR 30909, July 5, 1983, as amended at 62 FR 40200, July 25, 1997]
# s Subsecretaria deTransporte Direccion General deAeromiutica Civil SECR.ITA.tt.fA**t~E** CO,"dit,.JNH.:.<\<.:!ONfS

Y**TRA:--l~PQRTE-S**



### Mr.PaulL. Gretch Director Office ofInternational Aviation U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Dear Mr. Gretch: 4.1.- 

# 1.65

Mexico City, February 1St, 2013

This letter is to confirm that the Mexica11 Civil Aviation Authority, on the basis of reciprocity, will approve requests from United States of American designated or authorized airlines to perform seventh freedom all cargo charter opetations from third countries to Mexico on the understanding that US Government will approve requests from Mexican designated or authorized airlines to perf01m seventh freedom all cargo charter operations from the United States ofAmerica to third countries.

Authorizations to designated or approved all cargo carriers will be issued on a temporary basis for 180 days and both authorities will have the right to deny applications that enter in conflict with any scheduled route operated by the drat\dairlines ofboth countries 

# "" / \

\ f 1 \ I I ncJ.rely yours A • { / 

# j E1 biffctorGeneral 

# p 1 • \ 

### f 

# /i

i 

## J

# ··~ fi , , , I '>..... \ J

## /uoJ'/:'~ 

## f \**""-~** 

## .

"'- ,**A~e** 

### dro"''Argudin**Jte~y** l 

### "\\...);I I. i



### \ \ 

### \

'll ' \ \ \ 

# \ \



### . /'l 

# I

I 

# \r UR.6G/rhb* \ /""\ · cJ_p.-rr. Carlos F. Aldamh Lopez

### -'Stibsectt~tario deTransporte.- Pte c.c.p.- irecci6n General

# Ad juntade

### Transpo~e y Control Aerom1utico.- Pte 

## \ \

Blvd. Adoifo Lopez Mateos/1!990, Cot. Los Alpes Tlacopac, Delegaci6nAlvaro Obregon, Mexico D.F., CP. Ol 0!0.
1 

### Hutson, Nick

From: Szabo, Aaron <Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 1:47 PM To: Hutson, Nick; Culligan, Kevin; Harvey, Reid Cc: Frey, Nathan J.; Grossman, Andrea Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO12866 and 1 3563 -- 111(b) TSDs on Review of Electric Utility Integrated Resource Plans, Geograp hic Availability, and Achievability of the Standard for Newly Constructed Steam Generating EGU s Attachments: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO12866_EO135 63_111bTSDs.docx

Attached please find a summary of interagency comme nts under EO 12866 and 13563 on the following TSDs related to 111(b):
1. Review of Electric Utility Integrated Resource Plan s; 2. Geographic Availability; and
3. Achievability of the Standard for Newly Constructed Steam Generating EGUs.

Thank you and please let me know if you have any qu estions.

Aaron L. Szabo Policy Analyst Office of Management and Budget
202-395-3621 Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov