alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 20656 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Evaristo Mercado**

**- Garcia,** 

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:19

- CR

- 919

- 6

Before **King, Higginson,**  and **Willett,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

The attorney appointed to represent Evaristo Mercado

- Garcia has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Mercado

- Garcia has not filed a response. We have reviewed

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 26, 2022
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-20656 Document: 00516407116 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/26/2022No. 21

- 20656

2 counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous
issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to
withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 21-20656 Document: 00516407116 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/26/2022
Editorial Note on Part 622
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 622 appear at 79 FR 57837, Sept. 26, 2014 and at 81 FR 32253, May 23, 2016.

§ 622.9 Prohibited gear and methods—general. This section contains prohibitions on use of gear and methods that are of general applicability, as specified. Additional prohibitions on use of gear and methods applicable to specific species or species groups are contained in subparts B through U of this part. ( a ) *Explosives.* An explosive (except an explosive in a powerhead) may not be used to fish in the Caribbean, Gulf, or South Atlantic EEZ. A vessel fishing in the EEZ for a species governed in this part, or a vessel for which a permit has been issued under this part, may not have on board any dynamite or similar explosive substance.
( b ) *Chemicals and plants.* A toxic chemical may not be used or possessed in a coral area.
( c ) *Fish traps.* A fish trap may not be used or possessed in the Gulf or South Atlantic EEZ. A fish trap deployed in the Gulf or South Atlantic EEZ may be disposed of in any appropriate manner by the Assistant Administrator or an authorized officer.
( d ) *Weak link.* A bottom trawl that does not have a weak link in the tickler chain may not be used to fish in the Gulf EEZ. For the purposes of this paragraph, a weak link is defined as a length or section of the tickler chain that has a breaking strength less than the chain itself and is easily seen as such when visually inspected.
( e ) *Use of Gulf reef fish as bait prohibited.* Gulf reef fish may not be used as bait in any fishery, except that, when purchased from a fish processor, the filleted carcasses and offal of Gulf reef fish may be used as bait in trap fisheries for blue crab, stone crab, deep-water crab, and spiny lobster.
[78 FR 22952, Apr. 17, 2013, amended at 87 FR 56216, Sept. 13, 2022]
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our reports dated February 10, 2000, accompanying the
consolidated financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of
Winstar Communications, Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1999. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said
reports in the Registration Statements of Winstar Communications, Inc. on Forms
S-8 (Registration Nos. 33-87568; 33-98668; 333-47391; 333-31057; 333-15073;
333-63541 and 333-75461), and on Forms S-3 (Registration Nos. 333-18465;
333-50575 and 333-86293).



GRANT THORNTON LLP

New York, New York
February 10, 2000
# EUR-Lex - 12008E167 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12008E167

**Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - PART THREE: UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS - TITLE XIII: CULTURE - Article 167 (ex Article 151 TEC) **

*
Official Journal 115 , 09/05/2008 P. 0121 - 0122 *

Article 167

(ex Article 151 TEC)

1. The Union shall contribute to the flowering of the cultures of the Member States, while respecting their national and regional diversity and at the same time bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore.

2. Action by the Union shall be aimed at encouraging cooperation between Member States and, if necessary, supporting and supplementing their action in the following areas:

- improvement of the knowledge and dissemination of the culture and history of the European peoples,

- conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance,

- non-commercial cultural exchanges,

- artistic and literary creation, including in the audiovisual sector.

3. The Union and the Member States shall foster cooperation with third countries and the competent international organisations in the sphere of culture, in particular the Council of Europe.

4. The Union shall take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of the Treaties, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures.

5. In order to contribute to the achievement of the objectives referred to in this Article:

- the European Parliament and the Council acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Committee of the Regions, shall adopt incentive measures, excluding any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States,

- the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, shall adopt recommendations.

--------------------------------------------------
Hogan Lovells US LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in the District of Columbia. “Hogan Lovells” is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US

LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP, with offices in: Abu Dhabi Alicante Amsterdam Baltimore Beijing Berlin Brussels Caracas Colorado Springs Denver

Dubai Dusseldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Hanoi Ho Chi Minh City Hong Kong Houston London Los Angeles Madrid Miami Milan Moscow Munich New York

Northern Virginia Paris Philadelphia Prague Rome San Francisco Shanghai Silicon Valley Singapore Tokyo Ulaanbaatar Warsaw Washington DC Associated

offices: Budapest Jakarta Jeddah Riyadh Zagreb. For more information see www.hoganlovells.com

\\DC - 039578/000001 - 3406479 v1

Hogan Lovells US LLP

Columbia Square

555 Thirteenth Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20004

+1.202.637.5600 Tel

+1.202.637.5910 Fax

Robert E. Cohn

Partner

+1.202.637.4999 Direct Line

robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com

May 10, 2012

BY ELECTRONIC MAIL AND ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION

Ms. Catherine O'Toole

Air Carrier Fitness Division

Office of Aviation Analysis

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Application of People Express Airlines, Inc. for a Certificate,

Docket DOT-OST-2012-0042 - Accident Plan Compliance Notice

Dear Ms. O'Toole:

In further response to the Department’s Information Request dated April 19, 2012, this

letter serves as Notice that People Express Airlines, Inc. has filed an accident plan that

meets the requirements of 49 U.S.C. § 41113(b) in Docket DOT-OST-1996-1960 and

has sent a copy of that plan to the National Transportation Safety Board.

Please contact me if the Department requires additional information to advance the

processing of People Express’s application.

Respectfully submitted,

Robert E. Cohn

Counsel for People Express Airlines, Inc.

cc: Michael Morisi, President, People Express Airlines, Inc.
Case 16-28594 Doc 4 Filed 09/07/16 Entered 09/07/16 15:19:03 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 16-28594 Doc 4 Filed 09/07/16 Entered 09/07/16 15:19:03 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
DOT- OST- SCXD i -1 ot^ ^ 

CITY OF WATERTOW N 

23 Second St. NE • P.O. Box 910 • Watertown. South Dakota 57201-0910 

Website: www.watertownsd.us 

Mayor 

605-882-6204 

Fax 605-882-5214 

Building & Planning 

Department 

605-882-6201 

Fax 605-882-5264 

City Attorney 

605-882-6200 

Fax 605-882-5214 

Engineering Dept. 

605-882-6202 

Fax 605-882-5264 

Finance Office 

605-882-6203 

FAX 605-882-6218 

Fire Department 

605-886-4733 

FAX 605-886-0795 

Information Technology 

605-882-6200 

FAX 605-882-5264 

Library 

605-882-6220 

FAX 605-882-6221 

Mt. Hope Cemetery 

605-882-6208 

Park, Rec & 

Forestry Dept. 

605-882-6260 

FAX 605-882-5204 

Police Dept. 

605-882-6210 

FAX 605-882-6216 

Public Works Dept. 

605-882-6204 

Fax 605-882-5264 

Regional Airport 

605-882-6209 

Fax 605-882-5285 

Solid Waste Dept. 

605-882-6219 

Fax 605-882-6375 

Street Dept. 

605-882-6207 

Watertown 

Community 

Recreation Center 

605-882-6250 

FAX 605-882-6254 

Waste Water 

Treatment Facility 

605-882-6243 

FAX 605-882-6242 

1 

Si 

•0 

CD 

r1 i 

C O 

WATERTOW N 

Dokotfl' s Risin g St<ir 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Chief EAS & Domestic Analysis Division 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

May 09,2011 

Brick A. Dahl, CM. 

Airport Manager 

Watertown Regional Airport 

2416 Boeing Avenue 

Watertown, SD 57201 

RE: Essential Airlines Proposal Review and Community Considerations 

The community of Watertown, South Dakota would like to thank Air Choice 

One, Mesaba Airlines, and Seaport Airlines for their proposal for air service into the 

Watertown Regional Airport. Upon review of the proposals received and after visiting 

with members of the Chamber of Commerce, City Council, Focus Watertown, and the 

Mayor of Watertown, the community has selected Mesaba Airlines to provide air service 

to the City of Watertown, South Dakota. 

Sincerely, 

" I 

i-:j3 

Erick A. Dahl
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 17
- 00017
- CV

Baskerville O. Weaver, Appellant

v. Deborah Eklund White, Appellee

FROM THE 22ND DISTRI CT COURT OF HAYS COU NTY NO. 14
- 2285, THE HON ORABLE WILLIAM R. HE NRY, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R
PER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief on appeal was originally due on October 19, 2017. On November 2, 2017 , this Court sent a notice to appellant informing him that his brief was overdue
and that a failure to file a satisfactory response by November 13 , 2017 , would result in the dismissal of this appeal for want of prosecution. On November 13, 2017, appellant, acting pro

se, filed a first motion for extension of time , requesting that the Court extend the ti me for filing appellant’s brief until January 29, 2018, a date 102 days past his original due date. We grant in
part the motion for extension of time and order appellant to file a brief no later than
December 6, 2017 . No further extension of time will be granted and failure to comply with this
order may result in dismissal of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a).

It is ordered on November 16, 2017

. Before Justices Puryear, Field, and Bourland
FY 2022 COPS Office Programs 

Navigating Solicitation Surveys in JustGrants 

Please refer to the following steps to help guide you through initiating, completing, modifying, and obtaining the 

status of solicitation surveys in the JustGrants system. 

1. To initiate a survey, please click on the survey title to open.

2. When you have completed the survey, please click the “Finish” button on the lower right corner of the screen.

The system will direct you to a review screen displaying your survey responses.

Please be advised: You may notice survey responses are not displayed properly in the survey response review 

screen. This is a known system bug, which is being corrected. Please be assured, your data is captured and 

saved in the JustGrants system. 
 

 

 

 

2022 COPS Office Programs: Navigating Solicitation Surveys in JustGrants

3. To go back to the initial list of surveys, go to the “Actions” menu at the top right hand of the screen and select

“Close” to exit the survey review screen. The survey just completed will still display an “Open” status.

4. To confirm the completed status of your survey, go back to the “Actions” menu and select “Refresh.” The

status of your completed survey will change to “Resolved-Completed.”

2 
 

 

 

 

2022 COPS Office Programs: Navigating Solicitation Surveys in JustGrants

5. If you would like to verify the survey responses of a completed survey, you may click the survey title to

reopen the selected survey to view your saved responses. If you would like to change and/or update the

survey responses of a completed survey, you may click the “Re-open” option to update your saved responses.

Remember, to confirm the status of a completed survey, you will need to click the “Actions” menu and 

“Refresh.” 

3
Milford Municipal Court,

No. 4653.

#### State *v.*Bentley Farwell.

Submitted February 4, 1959.

Decided February 27, 1959.

*Louis C. Wyman,*Attorney General, *John J. Zimmerman,*Assist*4ant Attorney General, and *Conrad Danais,*county attorney, for the State.

*Leonard G. Velishka*for the defendant.

Blandin, J.

It is too well settled here to require extended citation that the test to determine the sufficiency of a complaint or indictment is to inquire whether it “informs the defendant ‘of the nature and cause of the accusation with sufficient definiteness’ so that he can prepare for trial.” *State*v. *Rousten,*84 N. H. 140, 143.

It is not essential to the validity of a complaint or indictment that it could possibly be made more comprehensive and certain; it is only necessary that it allege “every element of the offense charged in language sufficiently definite to apprise the respondents of what they-'must be prepared to meet for trial.” *State*v. *Story,*97 N. H. 141, 146. In the present case the complaint used the words of the statute and also alleged specific overt acts, namely that the defendant threw “two stones on the windshield” of the automobile of the complainant’s husband, “whereby” his property was damaged “in an amount exceeding Fifteen Dollars.” This has been held sufficient. See *State*v. *Davis,*99 N. H. 88, 89.

Such cases as *State*v. *Gilbert,*89 N. H. 134, relied upon by the defendant, where the accused was not informed of facts reasonably necessary to enable him to prepare for trial, are clearly distinguishable from the situation before us and do not support the defendant’s position. It follows the order is

*Exception overruled.*

All concurred.
SI()-I()03{)S-()I4 

Miami-Dade Aviation Department 

P.O. Box 025504 

; 1 (^' •••::"!;,• Mr^M Miami, Florida 33102-5504 

M,A„, ,sfF«NAT,ssiL *.R«S¥ T 305-876-7000 F 305-876-0948 

www.miami-airport.com 

con«,«rci.i Airports miamidade.gov 

Mtiimi InternalliHul Aifpori 

General Aviation Airports; 

O^de-Colticr Training & Transition 

Homc^cid Gcncr*)! 

Kcndjll'TomMmi Executive 

Opa-lockj Executive 

March 4, 2010 

The Honorable Raymond H. LaHood 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Docket DOT-OST-2010-0034 

Dear Mr, Secretary: 

On behalf of the Mlaml-Dade County Aviation Department, which operates Miami International 

Airport (MIA), I want to thank you for the opportunity to express our support for the application for 

antitrust immunity and proposed Joint business agreement filed by American Airlines and Japan 

Airlines. The proposed alliance between these two airlines is vital for oneworld to compete 

effectively with the Star and SkyTeam alliances. This increased inter-alllance competition will in 

turn enhance the benefits of the Department's Open Skies policy - first by solidifying U.S.-Japan 

Open Skies, then by serving as a foundation for further liberalization across Asia. 

We encourage the Department of Transportation to approve this application as it would enable 

these oneworld alliance airlines to work closely together to deliver highly competitive air 

transportation services. Approval for the AA/JAL alliance will have a positive impact on air travel 

by offering customers more service, scheduling and pricing options and will help to ensure that 

customers continue to benefit from having three competitive air alliances to choose from. 

Additionally, within the context of MIA's standing as the second leading gateway to the United 

States, and as the leading gateway to the Latin American / Caribbean Region, we also believe 

that approval of this alliance will afford our airport and community a more competitive posture in 

our ability to facilitate travel and trade between the Americas and Asia, therefore stimulating 

greater economic growth during these difficult economic times. 

uickly approve this application.
#### § 520.1872 Praziquantel, pyrantel pamoate, and febantel tablets.

(a) *Specifications.* Each tablet or chewable tablet contains either:

(1) Tablet No. 1: 22.7 milligrams praziquantel, 22.7 milligrams pyrantel base, and 113.4 milligrams febantel; or

(2) Tablet No. 2: 68 milligrams praziquantel, 68 milligrams pyrantel base, and 340.2 milligrams febantel.

(3) Tablet No. 3: 136 milligrams (mg) praziquantel, 136 mg pyrantel base, and 680.4 mg febantel.

(b) *Sponsor.* See No. 058198 in [§ 510.600(c) of this chapter](/on/2024-09-23/title-21/section-510.600#p-510.600(c)).

(c) *Conditions of use* —

(1) *Dogs* —

(i) *Amount.* Administer as a single dose directly by mouth or in a small amount of food as follows:

| Weight of animal | | Number of tablets per dose | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Kilograms | Pounds | Tablet no. 1 | Tablet no. 2 | Tablet no. 3 |
| 0.9 to 1.8 | 2 to 4 | 1/2 | | |
| 2.3 to 3.2 | 5 to 7 | 1 | | |
| 3.6 to 5.4 | 8 to 12 | 1 1/2 | | |
| 5.9 to 8.2 | 13 to 18 | 2 | | |
| 8.6 to 11.4 | 19 to 25 | 2 1/2 | | |
| 11.8 to 13.6 | 26 to 30 | | 1 | |
| 14.1 to 20.0 | 31 to 44 | | 1 1/2 | |
| 20.4 to 27.2 | 45 to 60 | | 2 | 1 |
| 27.7 to 40.9 | 61 to 90 | | | 1 1/2 |
| 41.3 to 54.5 | 91 to 120 | | | 2 |

(ii) *Indications for use.* For the removal of tapeworms (*Dipylidium caninum, Taenia pisiformis, Echinococcus granulosus*); hookworms (*Ancylostoma caninum, Uncinaria stenocephala*); ascarids (*Toxocara canis, Toxascaris leonina*); and whipworms (*Trichuris vulpis*) and for the removal and control of tapeworm *Echinococcus multilocularis* in dogs.

(iii) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.

(2) [Reserved]

[[59 FR 33908](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/59-FR-33908), July 1, 1994, as amended at [61 FR 29651](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-29651), June 12, 1996; [68 FR 22293](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/68-FR-22293), Apr. 28, 2003; [71 FR 6677](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/71-FR-6677), Feb. 9, 2006; [86 FR 14819](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/86-FR-14819), Mar. 19, 2021; [87 FR 58961](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/87-FR-58961), Sept. 29, 2022]
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D,C;2046.T 

Jan Witold Baran OCT tains 

Caleb P. Bums 

Wiley Rein LLP 

1776 K Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20006 

RE: MUR 6589R 

American Action Network 

Dear Mr. Baran: 

On June 12, 2012, the Federal Election Commission notified your client, American 

Action Network, of the complaint in MUR 6589 alleging that it violated the Federal Election 

Campaign Act of 1971, as amended. 

On June 24,2014, the Commission considered the complaint, but there was an 

insufficient number of votes to find reason to believe that American Action Network violated 

52 U.S.C. §§ 30102, 30103, and 30104. Accordingly, the Commission closed its file in this 

matter. 

The Commission's decision was challenged in CREW v. FEC, et a/.. No. 1:14-cv-01419. 

On September 19,2016, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the 

Commission to appeal or act in accordance with the Court's declaration on remand. On 

September 29, the Commission was unable to reach agreement by the required four affirmative 

votes to appeal the matter. Pursuant to the court's remand, this matter has been reopened and 

numbered MUR 6589R. 

We ask that you inform your client of this Commission determination. We will notify 

you immediately regarding any determination the Commission makes with regard to MUR 

6589R. 

If you have any questions, please contact Peter Reynolds, the attorney assigned to this 

matter at (202) 694-1650. 

Sincerely, 

Kathleen Guith 

Acting Associate General Counsel for 

Enforcement
### NUM BER 13-0 8-00 673- CR 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I - E DI NBURG M A NU EL A BELA RD O R OJAS, A pp ellan t, v . TH E STA

TE OF T EXAS, A pp ellee

. On ap pe al f rom th e 3 70t h Dist rict C ou rt of H ida lgo C ou nty , T exas . 

## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON Be fo re Ju stice s R od rigu ez, Garza, a nd Ve la M emo rand um Opin ion Pe r Cu riam App ellant , Manue l Abelard o Rojas, atte mp ts to app eal his con v iction for indece ncy w it h a ch il d. The tr ial co urt has ce rt ified thatthi s “ is a pl ea- barg ain ca se, and the def end anthas NO rig ht of app eal.” See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25 .2(a)(2).2

On Novemb er 25, 2 008 , this Court no tif ied ap pellan t’s coun sel of t h e t rial court’s cer ti ficat ion and ord ered counse l to: (1 ) rev iew the re cord; (2) determi ne w hether appel lan t has a rig ht to app eal; a nd (3) forw ard to th is Cou rt , by l etter , cou nsel ’s findi ng s a s t o w hether appel lan t has a ri g ht to appeal , or , alt er nati v ely , adv is e thi s Cou rtas to the ex is tenc e of any

amended cer

ti ficat ion

. On Dece mb er 15, 2 008 , coun sel f iled a lette r brief w ith this Court. Counsel’s respo nse d oes n ot est ablish th at th e certif ication currently on file w ith this Court is incorrect or thatappel lan t ot her

w is e has a r ig ht t o appea l. The Tex as Rul es of Appel lat e Proc edure prov ide that an appeal mustbe d is mis sed if the trial court’s certif ication doe s not sho w thatthe d e f e n dan t has th e rig ht of app eal. T EX . R. A PP . P. 25. 2(d); se e T EX . R. A PP . P. 37 .1, 4 4.3 , 44. 4. Acco rdingly , this app eal is DI SM ISSE D. An y

pendi ng moti ons are deni ed as moot.

PERC UR IAM Do not p ubl is h. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 47 .2(b). Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv ered and filed thi s t he 15th day

of Janua ry , 200 9.
#### § 1231.14 May the records of terminated agencies be transferred to another agency?

The records of executive agencies whose functions are terminated or are in process of liquidation may be transferred to another executive agency that inherits the function. All such transfers must be made in accordance with the provisions of this part.
# EUR-Lex - 12006E283 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12006E283

**Treaty establishing the European Community (consolidated version) - Part Six - General and final provisions - Article 283 **

*
Official Journal C 321 E , 29/12/2006 P. 0171 - 0171 Official Journal C 325 , 24/12/2002 P. 0146 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 340 , 10/11/1997 P. 0293 - Consolidated version *

Article 283

The Council shall, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the other institutions concerned, lay down the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of employment of other servants of those Communities.

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