alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 109-1.107-50 Consultation regarding DOE-PMR. ( a ) The DOE-PMR shall be fully coordinated with all Departmental elements substantively concerned with the subject matter.
( b ) The accountable Under Secretary is responsible for implementation of the DOE PMR through their respective DOE elements.
( c ) Program Secretarial Officers and DOE elements with responsibility for personal property, as delegated by their cognizant Under Secretary, may develop program management plans and issue internal program office guidance that is aligned to the requirements in the DOE-PMR and as explicitly authorized by their Under Secretary.
( d ) Heads of Contracting Activity designates Organizational Property Management Officers (OPMO) to establish and administer personal property management programs within their organizations.
( e ) Contracting Officers designates Property Administrators (PA) as authorized representatives responsible performing delegated contract administration functions for contract and financial assistance requirements relating to Government personal property.
( f ) The Office of Management is responsible for Agency-level management of the contract property program and provides policy and management assistance in support of the policy implementation effort. The Office of Management designates an Agency Property Executive to serve as National Utilization Officer responsible for promoting acquisition and utilization of excess personal property and for establishing policies, standards, and guidance in accordance with applicable laws, regulations and sound personal property management practices and standards.
§ 105-71.150 Closeout. ( a ) *General.* The Federal agency will close out the award when it determines that all applicable administrative actions and all required work of the grant has been completed.
( b ) *Reports.* Within 90 days after the expiration or termination of the grant, the grantee must submit all financial, performance, and other reports required as a condition of the grant. Upon request by the grantee, Federal agencies may extend this timeframe. These may include but are not limited to: ( 1 ) Final performance or progress report.
( 2 ) Financial Status Report (SF 269) or Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursement for Construction Programs (SF-271) (as applicable).
( 3 ) Final request for payment (SF-270) (if applicable).
( 4 ) Invention disclosure (if applicable).
( 5 ) Federally-owned property report: In accordance with § 105-71.132(f), a grantee must submit an inventory of all federally owned property (as distinct from property acquired with grant funds) for which it is accountable and request disposition instructions from the Federal agency of property no longer needed.
( c ) *Cost adjustment.* The Federal agency will, within 90 days after receipt of reports in paragraph (b) of this section, make upward or downward adjustments to the allowable costs.
( d ) *Cash adjustments.* ( 1 ) The Federal agency will make prompt payment to the grantee for allowable reimbursable costs.
( 2 ) The grantee must immediately refund to the Federal agency any balance of unobligated (unencumbered) cash advanced that is not authorized to be retained for use on other grants.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20 - 03 79 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CLAYTON LEE WELLKNOWN,

Defendant and Appellant.

**GRANT** Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until November 4 , 2020, to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court September 28 2020

09/28/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0379
4

. M aterials pertaining to the ARB’s regulatory action (see

Formal Letter of Submittal to the U.S. EPA:

The adoption of amendments to Article 2, Consumer

Products Regulation

.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Jeffrey Bernal v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-17-00535-CR

Trial court case number: 46141

Trial court: 33rd District Court of Burnet County

Appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, signed only by appellant’s counsel. Rule 

42.2(a) permits an appellant to file a motion to dismiss his or her appeal, but the motion must be 

signed by appellant and appellant’s attorney. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). 

Because appellant’s motion is not signed by appellant, we deny the motion without 

prejudice to the refiling of a motion to dismiss that complies with Rule 42.2(a).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael Massengale

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 11, 2018
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 05610

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

x 05610\05610_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

05610\05610_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

05610\05610_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 05610\05610_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 05610\05610_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 05610\05610_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 05610\05610_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 05610\05610_PartD.xls Plant submitted survey file

05610\Supplemental Documents\05610_Healy EPA dwgs.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

05610\05610_Certification Statement.pdf Plant certification statement

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
§ 105-70.006 Prerequisites for issuing a complaint. ( a ) The reviewing official may issue a complaint under § 105-70.007 only if— ( 1 ) The Department of Justice approves the issuance of a complaint in a written statement described in 31 U.S.C. 3803(b)(1), and
( 2 ) In the case of allegations of liability under § 105-70.003(a) with respect to a claim, the reviewing official determines that, with respect to such claim or a group of related claims submitted at the same time such claim is submitted (as defined in paragraph (b) of this section), the amount of money or the value of property or services demanded or requested in violation of § 105-70.003(a) does not exceed $150,000.
( b ) For the purposes of this section, a related group of claims submitted at the same time shall include only those claims arising from the same transaction (e.g., grant, loan, application, or contract) that are submitted simultaneously as part of a single request, demand, or submission.
( c ) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the reviewing official's authority to join in a single complaint against a person claims that are unrelated or were not submitted simultaneously, regardless of the amount of money or the value of property or services demanded or requested.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION 

No. 0:22-cv-62333-RAR

MT. HAWLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

PLYMOUTH PLAZA, LLC, 

Defendant. 

_________________________________/ 

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS 

Attorney Adam Topel, Esq., files this notice of change of address in the abovecaptioned case. All future pleadings, memoranda, correspondence, orders, etc., shall 

be sent to: 

Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig, LLP 

400 North Ashley Drive 

Suite 2300 

Tampa, FL 33602 

Tel: 813-281-1900 

Fax: 813-281-0900 

Respectfully submitted, 

BUTLER WEIHMULLER KATZ CRAIG LLP 

/s/ Adam M. Topel

FAY E. RYAN, ESQ. 

Florida Bar No. 0965944 

Case 0:22-cv-62333-KMW Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2023 Page 1 of 2
2 

fryan@butler.legal 

ADAM M. TOPEL, ESQ. 

Florida Bar. No. 113916 

atopel@butler.legal 

Secondary: bmoore@butler.legal 

400 North Ashley Drive, Suite 2300 

Tampa, Florida 33602 

Telephone: (813) 281-1900 

Facsimile: (813) 281-0900 

Counsel for Plaintiff, Mt. Hawley Insurance 

Company 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing notice has been served to all counsel of 

record on January 20, 2023 via the CM/ECF system. 

/s/ Adam M. Topel

ADAM M. TOPEL 

Case 0:22-cv-62333-KMW Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2023 Page 2 of 2
* 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 April 12, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50314 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus GABRIEL BENITEZ-VILLAFUERTE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:05-CR-12-ALL

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *The attorney appointed to represent Gabriel BenitezVillafuerte has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Benitez-Villafuerte has not filed a response to counsel’s motion. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
                         ------------------------------

Unidigital Elements (NY), Inc., a New York corporation

Unidigital Elements (SF), Inc., a Delaware corporation, doing business as TX,
     Unidigital California, Inc. and Unison (SF) in California

Unison (NY), Inc., a Delaware corporation

Unison (MA), Inc., a Delaware corporation

Mega Art Corp., a New York corporation

SuperGraphics Holding Company, Inc., a Delaware corporation

SuperGraphics Corporation, a California corporation, and wholly-owned
     subsidiary of SuperGraphics Holding Company, Inc.

Elements (UK) Limited, a United Kingdom corporation

Regent Group Limited, a United Kingdom corporation, and wholly-owned subsidiary
     of Elements (UK) Limited
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                         555,634
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 18,830,329
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       5,842,678
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,831,378
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,430,056
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      7,777,376
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,516
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,499,937
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,430,056
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,832,572
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,489,358
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,926,558
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             185,078
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                231,578
<INCOME-TAX>                                   110,487
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            121,091
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   121,091
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> CT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 647,661
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           277
<OTHER-SE>                                      98,315
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   647,661
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               161,595
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,170)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,085)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,085)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

                        C.F.O. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                   EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13A-14(b) AND 15D-14(b)


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Consumers, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 29, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(b) and
15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) that he is the Chief Financial Officer of the
Company and 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 as of and for
the periods covered in the Report.

/s/ Paul R. Cook
___________________________________
Paul R. Cook
Executive Vice President and Treasurer (Chief Financial Officer)
American Consumers, Inc.


Date:  January 13, 2004



<PAGE>
106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 764

AN ACT

To reduce the incidence of child abuse and neglect,

and for other purposes.
106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 764

AN ACT

To reduce the incidence of child abuse and neglect, and

for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 764 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Child Abuse Preven3 tion and Enforcement Act’’.

4 SEC. 2. GRANT PROGRAM.

5 Section 102(b) of the Crime Identification Tech6 nology Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C. 14601(b)) is amended by

7 striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (15), by striking

8 the period at the end of paragraph (16) and inserting ‘‘;

9 and’’, and by adding after paragraph (16) the following:

10 ‘‘(17) the capability of the criminal justice sys11 tem to deliver timely, accurate, and complete crimi12 nal history record information to child welfare agen13 cies, organizations, and programs that are engaged

14 in the assessment of risk and other activities related

15 to the protection of children, including protection

16 against child sexual abuse, and placement of chil17 dren in foster care.’’.

18 SEC. 3. USE OF FUNDS UNDER BYRNE GRANT PROGRAM

19 FOR CHILD PROTECTION.

20 Section 501(b) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Con21 trol and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3751) is

22 amended—

23 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph

24 (25);

25 (2) by striking the period at the end of para26 graph (26) and adding ‘‘; and’’; and
3

•HR 764 EH

1 (3) by adding at the end the following:

2 ‘‘(27) enforcing child abuse and neglect laws,

3 including laws protecting against child sexual abuse,

4 and promoting programs designed to prevent child

5 abuse and neglect.’’.

6 SEC. 4. CONDITIONAL ADJUSTMENT IN SET ASIDE FOR

7 CHILD ABUSE VICTIMS UNDER THE VICTIMS

8 OF CRIME ACT OF 1984.

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1402(d)(2) of the Victims

10 of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601(d)(2)) is

11 amended—

12 (1) by striking ‘‘(2) the next $10,000,000’’ and

13 inserting ‘‘(2)(A) Except as provided in subpara14 graph (B), the next $10,000,000’’; and

15 (2) by adding at the end the following:

16 ‘‘(B)(i) For any fiscal year for which the

17 amount deposited in the Fund is greater than the

18 amount deposited in the Fund for fiscal year 1998,

19 the $10,000,000 referred to in subparagraph (A)

20 plus an amount equal to 50 percent of the increase

21 in the amount from fiscal year 1998 shall be avail22 able for grants under section 1404A.

23 ‘‘(ii) Amounts available under this subpara24 graph for any fiscal year shall not exceed

25 $20,000,000.’’.
4

•HR 764 EH

1 (b) INTERACTION WITH ANY CAP.—Subsection (a)

2 shall be implemented so that any increase in funding pro3 vided thereby shall operate notwithstanding any dollar

4 limitation on the availability of the Crime Victims Fund

5 established under the Victims of Crime Act of 1984.

Passed the House of Representatives October 5,

1999.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF FREDERICK L. FULLER, DECEASED.

Essex County Court Probate Division

Decided April 16, 1951.

*328
      *Mr. Fredrick J. Waltzinger,*appearing for the applicant.

Ekancis, J. C. C.

Rebecca Bell Erbb was appointed administratrix of the estate of Charles Arthur Bell on December 5, 1950. This appointment followed the entry of judgment by the Surrogate of Essex County declaring Bell, a nonresident of New Jersey, presumptively dead under *B. 8.*3:42-16. Thereafter the administratrix, who is a daughter of Bell, made this application for an order directing the payment to her by the surrogate of certain moneys previously deposited with him, as Clerk of the Probate Division of the Essex County Court by executors of the estate of one Frederick L. Fuller.

*329The executors of the PulleT estate paid about $4,009 into court because they were unable to locate Charles Bell to whom it was bequeathed under the Fuller will.

The Fuller will bequeathed 2/64 of the residuary estate to Bell, but it provided that if he predeceased the testator the share should go to his surviving issue *per stirpes*and not *per capita.*

Fuller died April 29, 1943. Whether Bell’s administratrix is entitled to the fund on deposit depends on whether he survived Fuller. If lie did not, then his issue would be entitled to claim it.

The surrogate’s judgment is not a declaration of death under the statute relating to nonresidents. The surrogate has no authority to do so. His judgment is merely a presumption of the death of the nonresident so that assets in this State may be administered.

All the proof submitted on the application for administration shows that Bell was last heard from on or about May 6, 1931. Under the statute *(R. S.*3:42-1) or the common law, therefore, Bell is presumed to have died on May 6, 1938. *(Meyer v.*Madreperla, 68 *N. J. L.*258, 265 (E. *& A.*1902)). Therefore it would not be proper to direct the surrogate to pay the fund to the administratrix. The effect of this would be to permit disbursement of one-third of the fund to a non-beneficiary under the Fuller will, namely, the widow of decedent.

Under *R. S.*3:26-13 *et seq.*the court may order the payment of the fund on deposit to a person who seems rightfully entitled to it. Consequently, on a proper application, in view of the state of the record-proof here, it would seem proper to order payment to the two children of Bell, who are his only issue.

Since the institution of the proceeding by the administratrix, the children have filed a petition seeking such an order.. This order shall be entered.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          AMERICAN CONSUMERS, INC.
                                         NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE

                                                 EXHIBIT 11

                                                    THIRTEEN WEEKS ENDED          TWENTY-SIX WEEKS ENDED
                                               -----------------------------  ------------------------------
                                                November 29,   November 30,    November 29,    November 30,
                                                    2003           2002            2003            2002
                                               --------------  -------------  --------------  --------------
<S>                                            <C>             <C>            <C>             <C>
Net income (loss) for computing income (loss)
  per common share                             $     (28,715)  $      20,066  $     (43,000)  $      (9,765)
                                               ==============  =============  ==============  ==============



Weighted average number of common shares
  outstanding during each period                     815,618         817,657        815,406         819,384
                                               ==============  =============  ==============  ==============



Net income (loss) per common share             $      (0.035)  $       0.025  $      (0.053)  $      (0.012)
                                               ==============  =============  ==============  ==============
</TABLE>



<PAGE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 26, 2015

NO. 03-12-00117-CR

Saul Salinas, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 33RD DISTRICT COURT OF SAN SABA COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction.

Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
#### § 105-50.302 Special fee schedules.

Where there is no established schedule of fees for types of service which are ordinarily reimbursed on a fee basis, such schedules may be developed and promulgated in conjunction with the Office of Administration. The fees so established shall cover all direct costs, such as salaries of personnel involved plus personnel benefits, travel, and other related expenses and all indirect costs such as management, supervisory, and staff support expenses determined or estimated from the best available records in GSA. Periodically, fees shall be reviewed for adequacy of recovery and adjusted as necessary.