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

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 243 (Monday, December 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 78716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32414]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7730]

In the Matter of the Designation of Jose Antonio Urruticoechea 
Bengoechea Also Known as Jose Antonio Urrutikoetxea Bengoetxea Also 
Known as Josu Ternera as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist 
pursuant to Section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as Amended

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the individual known as Jose Antonio 
Urruticoechea Bengoechea, also known as Jose Antonio Urrutikoetxea 
Bengoetxea, also known as Josu Ternera, committed, or poses a 
significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the 
security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or 
economy of the United States.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that ``prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,'' I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: November 28, 2011.
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-32414 Filed 12-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
No. 11-6207.

#### Michel *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5068

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a credit for the

purchase of child restraint systems used in motor vehicles.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 21, 1994

Mr. FIELDS of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide

a credit for the purchase of child restraint systems used

in motor vehicles.

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

3 SECTION 1. CREDIT FOR PURCHASE OF CHILD RESTRAINT

4 SYSTEMS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subpart A of part IV of sub6 chapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of

7 1986 (relating to nonrefundable personal credits) is

8 amended by adding at the end thereof the following new

9 section:
2

•HR 5068 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 25A. PURCHASE OF CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEM.

2 ‘‘(a) GENERAL RULE.—In the case of an individual,

3 there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed

4 by this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to

5 the costs incurred by the taxpayer during such taxable

6 year in purchasing a qualified child restraint system for

7 any child of the taxpayer.

8 ‘‘(b) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section—

9 ‘‘(1) QUALIFIED CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEM.—

10 The term ‘qualified child restraint system’ means

11 any child restraint system which meets the require12 ments of section 571.213 of title 49 of the Code of

13 Federal Regulations.

14 ‘‘(2) CHILD.—The term ‘child’ has the meaning

15 given to such term by section 151(c)(3).’’.

16 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sec17 tions for subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter

18 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by

19 inserting after the item relating to section 25 the following

20 new item:

‘‘Sec. 25A. Purchase of child restraint system.’’.

21 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

22 this section shall apply to amounts paid after the date of

23 the enactment of this Act in taxable years ending after

24 such date.

Æ
NO. 07-11-0432-CR 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT AMARILLO 

PANEL C 

JUNE 26, 2012 

______________________________ 

BRIANN NICOLE WILSON, APPELLANT 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

_________________________________ 

FROM THE 181ST DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY; 

NO. 19411-B; HONORABLE JOHN BOARD, JUDGE 

_______________________________ 

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Appellant, Briann Nicole Wilson, perfected this appeal from the trial court's 

judgment revoking her community supervision which had been granted for the offense 

of tampering with evidence.1 Punishment was assessed at eight years confinement and 

a $500 fine. 

 

1

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 37.10 (West 2011). 
2

Pending before this Court is Appellant's Motion to Dismiss Appeal in which she 

represents she wishes to withdraw her notice of appeal. As required by Rule 42.2(a) of 

the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the motion is signed by Appellant and her 

attorney. No decision of this Court having been delivered, the motion is granted and the 

appeal is dismissed. No motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will 

issue forthwith. 

 Patrick A. Pirtle 

 Justice

Do not publish.
# Map            Vietnam.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

James Nathan Alexander, Appellant

No. 06-12-00133-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 188th District Court of 

Gregg County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 40028-

A). Opinion delivered by Justice Carter, 

Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Moseley

participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the 

judgment of the court below. Therefore, we modify the trial court’s judgment to delete the 

assessment of $10,111.50 in court costs. As modified, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed

in all other aspects.

We note that the appellant, James Nathan Alexander, has adequately indicated his 

inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED AUGUST 21, 2013

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### § 80.90 Suspension of transmission.

Transmission must be suspended immediately upon detection of a transmitter malfunction and must remain suspended until the malfunction is corrected, except for transmission concerning the immediate safety of life or property, in which case transmission must be suspended as soon as the emergency is terminated.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5002

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that disabled

individuals shall be eligible for the one-time exclusion of gain from

sale of principal residence.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 19, 1994

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide

that disabled individuals shall be eligible for the onetime exclusion of gain from sale of principal residence.

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

3 SECTION 1. DISABLED INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE FOR ONE4 TIME EXCLUSION OF GAIN FROM SALE OF

5 PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE.

6 (a) GENERAL RULE.—Paragraph (1) of section

7 121(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended

8 to read as follows:
2

•HR 5002 IH

1 ‘‘(1) the taxpayer has attained the age of 55

2 before the date of such sale or exchange or the tax3 payer is disabled as of such date, and’’.

4 (b) DISABILITY DEFINED.—Subsection (d) of section

5 121 of such Code is amended by adding at the end thereof

6 the following new paragraph:

7 ‘‘(10) DISABLED INDIVIDUAL.—For purposes of

8 this section, an individual is disabled if such individ9 ual—

10 ‘‘(A) has a disability meeting the require11 ments of section 216(i)(1) of the Social Secu12 rity Act, or

13 ‘‘(B) has a service-connected disability

14 rated as total by the Secretary of Veterans Af15 fairs under chapter 11 of title 38, United

16 States Code.’’

17 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

18 (1) Paragraph (1) of section 121(d) of such

19 Code is amended by striking ‘‘the age, holding, and

20 use requirements’’ each place it appears and insert21 ing ‘‘the requirements’’.

22 (2) The section heading for section 121 of such

23 Code is amended by inserting ‘‘OR IS DISABLED’’

24 before the period at the end thereof.
3

•HR 5002 IH

1 (3) The table of sections for part III of sub2 chapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by

3 inserting ‘‘or is disabled’’ before the period at the

4 end of the item relating to section 121.

5 (4) Sections 1033(h)(3), 1034(l),

6 1038(e)(1)(A), and 6012(c) of such Code are each

7 amended by inserting ‘‘or is disabled’’ after ‘‘age

8 55’’.

9 (5) Subparagraph (B) of section 1250(d)(7) of

10 such Code is amended—

11 (A) by striking ‘‘the age and ownership re12 quirements’’ and inserting ‘‘the age or disability

13 requirements, and the ownership require14 ments,’’, and

15 (B) by inserting ‘‘or is disabled’’ after

16 ‘‘age 55’’.

17 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

18 this section shall apply to sales or exchanges after the date

19 of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
| (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. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  June          12  ,      2009 | By:    |                                                                           |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                       |   | Warren HosseinionChief      Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer |
|                                                                                                       |   |                                                                           |

----
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-1197

___________

Northbrook Property and Casualty *

Insurance Company, an Illinois *

corporation, *

Defendant - Appellant, * District Court for the District

 v. *

Hormel Foods Corporation, *

Plaintiff - Appellee. *

* Appeal from the United States

* of Minnesota.

* [UNPUBLISHED]

*

___________

Submitted: November 17, 1997

Filed: December 5, 1997

___________

Before BOWMAN, LAY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Hormel Foods Corporation sued Northbrook Property and Casualty

Insurance Company seeking a declaration that Northbrook had a duty to

defend and indemnify Hormel in an action brought against it as a result of

a death at a hog processing facility leased to Quality Pork Processors,

Inc. The trustee for the heirs and next-of-kin of the decedent alleged

that the cause of the accident was Hormel's defective back-splitting
The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District 1

of Minnesota.

-2-

saw. The district court granted summary judgment to Hormel on the basis 1

that it was covered for liability arising out of the use of the leased

premises as an additional insured under an endorsement to Quality Pork's

liability policy with Northbrook. After reviewing the record, we affirm

on the basis of the district court's opinion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
§ 80.103 Digital selective calling (DSC) operating procedures. ( a ) Operating procedures for the use of DSC equipment in the maritime mobile service are as contained in ITU-R M.541-9 (incorporated by reference, see § 80.7), and subpart W of this part.
( b ) When using DSC techniques, coast stations and ship stations must use maritime mobile service identities (MMSI) assigned by the Commission or its designees.
( c ) DSC acknowledgment of DSC distress and safety calls must be made by designated coast stations and such acknowledgment must be in accordance with procedures contained in ITU-R M.541-9 (incorporated by reference, see § 80.7). Nondesignated public and private coast stations must follow the guidance provided for ship stations in ITU-R M.541-9 (incorporated by reference, see § 80.7), with respect to DSC “Acknowledgment of distress calls” and “Distress relays.” (See subpart W of this part.)
( d ) Group calls to vessels under the common control of a single entity are authorized. A group call identity may be created from an MMSI ending in a zero, assigned to this single entity, by deleting the trailing zero and adding a leading zero to the identity.
[68 FR 46961, Aug. 7, 2003, as amended at 73 FR 4480, Jan. 25, 2008; 76 FR 67610, Nov. 2, 2011]
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4772

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located

at 215 South Evans Street in Greenville, North Carolina, as the ‘‘Walter

B. Jones Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 14, 1994

Mr. TRAFICANT (for himself, Mr. LANCASTER, and Mrs. CLAYTON) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Public Works

and Transportation

A BILL

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 215 South Evans Street in Greenville,

North Carolina, as the ‘‘Walter B. Jones Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building and United States courthouse

5 located at 215 South Evans Street in Greenville, North

6 Carolina, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Walter

7 B. Jones Federal Building and United States Court8 house’’.
2

•HR 4772 IH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 building and United States courthouse referred to in sec5 tion 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Walter

6 B. Jones Federal Building and United States Court7 house’’.

Æ
**UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE ANN ARBOR, MI 48105 - 2498 OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION **September 9 , 20**  **13** MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Meeting with Allianc e of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) regarding Tier 3 FROM: Michael Olechiw TO: EPA Docket # EPA - HQ - OAR - 2011 - 0135 This memo documents a meeting held on September 9 , 201 3 between representatives of AAM and EPA to discuss Tier 3. The agenda as well as th e attendees are shown below. The purpose of the meeting was to clarify points in the Tier 3 rule .**EPA**

**– Alliance**  **Tier 3 Meeting**  Mon, 9 - Sep, 11:00 a.m. (Eastern) Call - In : (866) 401 - 3946 PI N: 317 - 117 - 0776# **Agenda** : 1. Introductions 2. R Factor 3. US06 PM Standard s 4. Update/Status of Tier 3 Rulemaking **EPA Attendees:** Bill Charmley Michael Olechiw **Industry Attendees**  : Name Company Julie Becker Alliance Giedrius Ambrozaitis Alliance Vaughn Burns Chrysler Cy nthia Williams Ford Jeff Glodich Ford Bob Babik GM Davi d Robertson Mazda Matt Kevnick Toyota Oliver Schmidt VW Jenny Sigelko VW Steve Douglas (*Phone) Alliance
No. 11-5955.

#### Kearns *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y REGIO N 8 99 9 18 TM STREE T - SUIT E 30 0 SOW S Documen t I D DENVER , C O 80202-246 6 IIHIIIIII/(ll//iiiin i Phon e 800-227-891 7 U'iillllll/IIIl M http://www.epa.gov/region0 8 200836 3 Septembe r 2,200 3 Ref : 8EPR-S R MEMORANDU M To : The Fil e From : Sta n Christensen , Projec t

Manager Subject : Californi aGulc h Operabl e Uni t 4 Al l constructio n activitie s associate dwit h th e Remedia

l Actio n fo r

Operabl e Uni t

4 (Uppe r Californi aGulch ) wer

e complete db y Decembe r 2002 . Severa

l wast e roc k pile s wer e consolidate dan dcapped , water diversio n structure s wer

e built , alon g wit

h settlin g ponds . A completio n repor

t fro mResurrectio n Minin g Compan y wa s submitte dan dapprove di n Februar y 2003 . The fina

l inspectio n wa s conducte do n Jun e 12,2003 . The remedy i s operatin g a s intended .

Printed on Recycled

Paper
#### § 95.703 Definitions, RCRS.

*Model aircraft.* A small imitation of an aircraft, such as an airplane or a helicopter.

*Model surface craft.* A small imitation of a boat, car, or other type of vehicle for carrying people or objects, other than an aircraft.

*Radio Control Radio Service (**RCRS).* A non-commercial short-distance radio service for wirelessly controlling the operation of devices, including, but not limited to, model vehicles such as aircraft and surface craft.

*RCRS transmitter.* A transmitter that is used or intended to be used in the RCRS.
No. 11-5865.

#### James *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Your session is about to expire.Resume session

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Welcome.Log inorregisterCOPS OFFICE RESOURCE CENTER

HomeCatalogCartOrders

                    

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                CatalogMatches: 1Offline form Recent Popular Online Print OtherCOPS-W0874An Interdisciplinary Approach to Addressing Violence: A Process Evaluation of the Minority Youth Violence Prevention InitiativeViolence continues to plague minority communities across the United States, which has implications not only for public safety but also for public health. The Minority Youth Violence Prevention Initiative seeks to engage public health organizations, law enforcement agencies, schools, juvenile justice agencies, and community-based groups to curb violence and reduce disparities in access to public health. The Center for Court Innovation was funded by the COPS Office to provide technical assistance and produce a final evaluation report identifying challenges, lessons learned, and recommendations for future programming on programs at nine sites funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Minority Health.By Jennifer A. Tallon, Rachel SwanerCategories: Violent Crime • Youth SafetyLanguage: EnglishPublic linkhttps://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter?item=cops-w0874Click here to see the entire catalog.Cart:Download PDFWeb • Oct 2019Search catalogreset title abstract authors contentContaining text: exact phraseNot containing text: exact phraseLanguage:anyEnglishSpanishHmongVietnameseCategory:anyAlternatives to IncarcerationCommunity PartnershipsData and AnalysisEthics and IntegrityFoundations of Community PolicingHiring, Recruitment, and RetentionHomeland SecurityNew Immigrant CommunitiesNonviolent CrimeOtherPolice OperationsPOP Center ResourceSchool and Campus SafetyTechnologyTribalViolent CrimeYouth SafetyPublished after:Published before:Page1

                    

FOIA | No FEAR Act | Open Government | Privacy | Legal|HelpCopyright (C) U.S. Department of Justice, COPS Office, IT Division, 2012 - 2024. All rights reserved.
Rendered on Mon Mar 4 2024 at 00:41 (UTC-5) in 0.19 secEnterprise Framework 3.21.7.7 • Store Controls 3.3.1.7Survey 500303407 Section 60000560 Rules Hints Inactive
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed 

February 11, 2020.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-20-00127-CV

IN RE CHRISTOPHER WOLMAN, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

245th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-85958

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On February 6, 2020, relator Christopher Wolman filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. 

P. 52. In the petition, relator complains of the February 4, 2020 order, orally 

rendered by the Honorable Tristian Longino, presiding judge of the 245th District 

Court of Harris County, denying relator’s request for a jury trial. .
2

Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. 

Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. We also deny 

relator’s emergency motion for stay.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Bourliot, Hassan, and Poissant.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4559 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4559

  To amend the Anglo-Irish Agreement Support Act of 1986 to prohibit 
   United States contributions to the International Fund for Ireland.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 9, 1994

Mr. Klug (for himself, Mr. Penny, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. Collins of Georgia, 
Mr. Doolittle, and Mr. Coble) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Anglo-Irish Agreement Support Act of 1986 to prohibit 
   United States contributions to the International Fund for Ireland.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR 
              IRELAND.

    Section 3 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement Support Act of 1986 (Public 
Law 99-415; 100 Stat. 947) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE 
              INTERNATIONAL FUND.

    ``Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, funds 
appropriated by the Congress may not be used for any United States 
contribution to the International Fund.''.

                                 <all>
```