alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Affirmed and Memorandum Majority Op inion and Memorandum

Concurring Opinion s filed October 27, 2022

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 21

- 00128

- CV

CITY OF HOUSTON , Appellant

V.

JIMMIE LEE JONES JUNIOR , Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at Law No

. 4

Harris County, Texas

Tria l Court Cause No. 1158605

M E M O R A N D U M C O N C U R R I N G O P I N I O N

I agree with the court ’ s judgment affirming the denial of the city ’ s motion

for summary judgment . I do not join the majority opinion, howeve r, because I do

not agree with the court ’ s discussion and analysis of the good faith issue. I nstead, I

would hold that a genuine and material fact question exists as to whether Sergeant

Kim was en gaged in a discretionary duty. It is unnecessary to addres s t he good2

fa ith element of official immunity in this case. For t he se reasons, I concur in the

judgment only.

/s/ Kevin Jewell

Justice

Panel consists of Justice s Jewell, Spain

, and Hassan. (Hassan, J., majo rit y )
#### § 665.168 Seasons.

The fishing year for precious coral begins on July 1 and ends on June 30 the following year.
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2012-0084 Directorate ID: 2010-SW-089-AD

Helicopter Model: Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited Model 427 Helicopters

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 28 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: This proposed AD is prompted by a review of the tailboom attachment installation, 

which revealed that the torque value of the bolts specified in the BHTC Model 427 Maintenance 

Manual and applied during manufacturing was incorrect and exceeded the torque range 

recommended for the bolts.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $488

Labor per Helicopter

(3 x $85/work-hour)

$255

Other (Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter for 

the first year

$913

Total US Fleet Cost

(estimated)

$25,564

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Sharon Miles
# EUR-Lex - 12006E120 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12006E120

**Treaty establishing the European Community (consolidated version) - Part Three - Community policies - TITLE VII - Economic and monetary policy - Chapter 4 - Transitional provisions - Article 120 **

*
Official Journal C 321 E , 29/12/2006 P. 0097 - 0097 Official Journal C 325 , 24/12/2002 P. 0084 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 340 , 10/11/1997 P. 0230 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 224 , 31/08/1992 P. 0041 - Consolidated version *

Article 120

1. Where a sudden crisis in the balance of payments occurs and a decision within the meaning of Article 119(2) is not immediately taken, the Member State concerned may, as a precaution, take the necessary protective measures. Such measures must cause the least possible disturbance in the functioning of the common market and must not be wider in scope than is strictly necessary to remedy the sudden difficulties which have arisen.

2. The Commission and the other Member States shall be informed of such protective measures not later than when they enter into force. The Commission may recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance under Article 119.

3. After the Commission has delivered an opinion and the Committee referred to in Article 114 has been consulted, the Council may, acting by a qualified majority, decide that the State concerned shall amend, suspend or abolish the protective measures referred to above.

4. Subject to Article 122(6), this Article shall cease to apply from the beginning of the third stage.

--------------------------------------------------
**Exhibit
        32.1**


**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**AND
      PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**




In
      connection with the accompanying Form 10-K of Rural Cellular Corporation for
      the
      year ended December 31, 2006, we, Richard P. Ekstrand, President and Chief
      Executive Officer of Rural Cellular Corporation, and Wesley E. Schultz,
      Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Rural Cellular
      Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:




(1)
      such
      Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, 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 such Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006,
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of Rural Cellular Corporation.






Date:March
                5, 2007
            
            /s/
                Richard P. EkstrandRichard
                P. EkstrandPresident
                and Chief Executive Officer





Date:March
                5, 2007
            
            /s/
                Wesley E. SchultzWesley
                E. SchultzExecutive
                Vice President and Chief Financial
                Officer
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 204 (Monday, October 23, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 62141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8861]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities 
and Exchange Commission will hold the following meeting during the week 
of October 23, 2006:
    A Closed Meeting will be held on Thursday, October 26, 2006 at 10 
a.m.
    Commissioners, Counsels to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the 
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting. 
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be 
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (8), (9)(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a) (3), (5), (7), (8), (9)(ii), and (10) permit consideration 
of the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Nazareth, as duty officer, voted to consider the items 
listed for the closed meeting in closed session.
    The subject matters of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, 
October 26, 2006 will be:
Formal orders of investigation;
Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an 
enforcement nature;
Other matters relating to enforcement proceeding;
Collection matter;
Regulatory matter regarding a financial institution; and
Adjudicatory matters.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have 
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: October 19, 2006.
J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-8861 Filed 10-19-06; 3:59 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### § 520.12 Photographs for news, advertising, or commercial purposes.

No photographs for advertising or any other commercial purpose may be taken on the premises unless officially authorized.
§ 261.14 Over-snow vehicle use. After National Forest System roads, National Forest System trails, and areas on National Forest System lands have been designated for over-snow vehicle use pursuant to 36 CFR 212.81 on an administrative unit or a Ranger District of the National Forest System, and these designations have been identified on an over-snow vehicle use map, it is prohibited to possess or operate an over-snow vehicle on National Forest System lands in that administrative unit or Ranger District other than in accordance with those designations, provided that the following vehicles and uses are exempted from this prohibition: ( a ) Limited administrative use by the Forest Service;
( b ) Use of any fire, military, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle for emergency purposes;
( c ) Authorized use of any combat or combat support vehicle for national defense purposes;
( d ) Law enforcement response to violations of law, including pursuit;
( e ) Over-snow vehicle use that is specifically authorized under a written authorization issued under Federal law or regulations; and
( f ) Use of a road or trail that is authorized by a legally documented right-of-way held by a State, county, or other local public road authority.
[80 FR 4512, Jan. 28, 2015]
[No. S015264.

Sept. 19, 1990.]

#### In re JOHN MICHAEL ROSS on Suspension.

Counsel

John Michael Ross, in pro. per., for Petitioner.

*452Diane C. Yu, Richard J. Zanassi, Colin P. Wong and William Davis for Respondent.

Opinion

THE COURT.

John Michael Ross, admitted to practice in 1977, was convicted of two counts of criminal contempt under title 18 United States Codes section 401. His conviction is now final.

We referred the matter to the State Bar for a hearing, report, and recommendation on the question whether the facts and circumstances surrounding the commission of the offenses involved moral turpitude or other misconduct warranting discipline and, if so found, the nature and extent of the discipline to be imposed. The State Bar’s report has now been filed. The State Bar Court concluded that Ross’s acts did not involve moral turpitude, but did constitute other misconduct warranting discipline. The State Bar recommends that Ross be suspended for two years, that execution of the suspension be stayed, and that he be placed on probation for two years on conditions including six months’ actual suspension. Ross filed timely objections to the State Bar’s recommendation and report, but did not make a timely request for oral argument. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 951(d).)

This court, after reviewing the entire record and considering all the facts and circumstances, has concluded that Ross’s conduct constituted misconduct warranting discipline and that he should be disciplined in accordance with the State Bar’s recommendation.

It is therefore ordered that John Michael Ross be suspended from the practice of law in the State of California for a period of two years, that execution of that suspension be stayed, and that he be placed on probation for two years on all the conditions, including six months’ actual suspension, set forth in the amended decision of the State Bar Court in this matter dated November 28, 1989, and filed with the State Bar Court Clerk’s Office on November 29, 1989. It is also ordered that Ross take and pass the Professional Responsibility Examination within one year after the effective date of this order. *(See Segretti*v. *State Bar*(1976) 15 Cal.3d 878, 891, fn. 8 [126 Cal.Rptr. 793, 544 P.2d 929].) It is further ordered that Ross comply with rule 955 of the California Rules of Court and that he perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of that rule within 30 and 40 days, respectively, after the date of this order. (See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6126, subd. (c).) This order is effective upon finality of this decision in this court. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 24(a).)

Petitioner’s application for a rehearing was denied November 14, 1990.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

BYRON PAUL MAYNE,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 786 MAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 17th day of February, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350
                (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)


I, JACKY S. CHANG, Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of EUPA
International Corporation, Inc. (the "Registrant"), certifies that to the best
of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
the period ended September 30, 2002 of the Registrant (the "Report"):

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.




/s/ Jacky S. Chang
------------------
Name: Jacky S. Chang
Date: November 14, 2002


                                  Exhibit 99.2
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-10252

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARK ANTHONY PEYSEN,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:15-CR-16-1

Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Mark Anthony Peysen 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). Peysen has not filed a response. We have reviewed 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 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 20, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-10252 Document: 00513804274 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2016
No. 16-10252

2

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: 16-10252 Document: 00513804274 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2016
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 201 (Wednesday, October 18, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 61479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8736]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology; American Health Information Community Quality Workgroup

ACTION: Announcement of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the third meeting of the American Health 
Information Community Quality Workgroup in accordance with the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.).

DATES: November 1, 2006, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Mary C. Switzer Building (330 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20201), Conference Room 4090 (you will need a photo ID to enter a 
Federal building).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/quality_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the meeting, the Workgroup will 
continue their discussion on a core set of quality measures and a 
discussion on the specific charge to the Workgroup.
    The meeting will be available via Internet access. For additional 
information, go to http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/quality_instruct.html.

    Dated: October 6, 2006.
Judith Sparrow,
Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and 
Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology.
[FR Doc. 06-8736 Filed 10-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-24-M
#### § 9.50 Do I need an operations permit for my previously exempt operations?

Yes. You must obtain an NPS operations permit.
,(62UGHU1XPEHU

5HJLVWU\1XPEHU &$,QGH[1DPH 3URSDQHWULROKRPRSRO\PHUGRGHFDQRDWH
```

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 193 (Thursday, October 5, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58864-58865]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8526]

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

HARRY S. TRUMAN SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION

Sunshine Act Meeting; Meeting of the Trustees and Officers of the 
Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation

    November 16, 2006, 3 p.m.-5 p.m. Rayburn House Office Building, 
Room 2216.

I. Welcome and Opening Comments.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of November 8, 2005.
III. Report from the President.
IV. Report from the Executive Secretary.
V. Report on 2006 Summer Institute, 2006/2007 Truman Fellows Program.

[[Page 58865]]

VI. Approval of Budget for FY 2007.
VII. Old Business.
VIII. New Business.
IX. Adjournment.

Frederick G. Slabach,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-8526 Filed 10-3-06; 9:49 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-AD-P
```
EXHIBIT 32.1 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, Steve Frickenstein, Chief Executive Officer of
Breda Telephone Corp., certify that to my knowledge (i) Breda Telephone Corp.s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Breda Telephone Corp. Date: May
  14, 2008/s/ Steve
  FrickensteinSteve
  Frickenstein, Chief Executive Officer E-5
#### § 51.8 Where will the Director publish the notice of availability of the prospectus?

The Director will publish notice of the availability of the prospectus at least once in the System for Award Management (SAM) where Federal business opportunities are electronically posted, or in a similar publication if this site ceases to be used. The Director, if determined appropriate, may also publish notices electronically on websites including social media and in local or national newspapers or trade magazines.

[88 FR 90118, Dec. 29, 2023]
Date or report 

1988 

Sept. 26 

Oct. 4 

Date or report 

----

1968 

Sept.25 

~ruutr nf tqr luitrb ~tntrs NINETIETH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION {Co~vened January ro, 1967 

Adjourned December 15, 1967 

SECOND SESSION {Convened January 15, 1968 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Prepared unde1' the dit'ection of FRANCIS R. VALEO, Secretary of the Senate 

By GERALD A. HACKETT, Executive Clerk 

Monday, October 7, 1968 

TREATIES 

Calendar 

No. Treaty No. Subject Action of committee 

10 Ex. H (90th Cong., The treaty on the nonproliferation of Reported favorably by 

2d ses~.). nuclear weapons. Mr. Sparkman, from 

the Committee on 

Foreign Relations, 

together with minority 

and individual views, 

with a printed report. 

(See Ex. Rept. No. 9, 

90th Cong., 2d sess.) 

16 Ex. J (90th Cong., Agreement on the rescue and return of Reported favorably by 

2d sess.). astronauts. Mr. Sparkman, from 

the Committee on 

Foreign Relations, 

with a printed report. 

(See Ex. Rept. No. 15, 

90th Cong., 2d sess.) 

NOMINATION 

Calendar Message Name of nominee Office Predecessor 

No. No. 

INDIAN CLAIMS 

COMMISSION 

893 331 T. Harold Scott, of A Commissioner of the 

Colorado. Indian Claims Commission. 

98-022--68--No. 204 

U.S. liiOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1968
§ 13.112 Permit revocation. ( a ) The superintendent may revoke a permit or lease issued pursuant to this subpart when the superintendent determines that the use under the permit or lease is causing or may cause significant detriment to the principal purposes for which the park area was established. *Provided, however*, that if a permittee submits a written request for a hearing concerning the revocation, based on the cause listed above, of a permit or lease issued pursuant to §§ 13.130, 13.136-13.149, or 13.160-168 of this subpart, the matter shall be assigned to an administrative law judge who, after notice and hearing and based on substantial evidence in the administrative record as a whole, shall render a recommended decision for the superintendent's review. The superintendent shall then accept, reject or modify the administrative law judge's recommended decision in whole or in part and issue a final decision in writing.
( b ) The superintendent may revoke or modify any permit or lease issued pursuant to this subpart when the permittee violates a term of the permit or lease.
§ 222.9 Range improvements. ( a ) The Chief, Forest Service, is authorized to install and maintain structural and nonstructural range improvements needed to manage the range resource on National Forest System lands and other lands controlled by the Forest Service.
( b ) Such improvements may be constructed or installed and maintained, or work performed by individuals, organizations or agencies other than the Forest Service subject to the following: ( 1 ) All improvements must be authorized by cooperative agreement or memorandum of understanding, the provisions of which become a part of the grazing permit(s).
( 2 ) Title to permanent structural range improvements shall rest in the United States.
( 3 ) Title to temporary structural range improvements may be retained by the Cooperator where no part of the cost for the improvement is borne by the United States.
( 4 ) Title to nonstructural range improvements shall vest in the United States.
( 5 ) Range improvement work performed by a cooperator or permittee on National Forest System lands shall not confer the exclusive right to use the improvement or the land influenced.
( c ) A user of the range resource on National Forest System lands and other lands under Forest Service control may be required by the Chief, Forest Service, to maintain improvements to specified standards.
( d ) Grazing fees or the number of animal months charged shall not be adjusted to compensate permittees for range improvement work performed on National Forest System lands: Provided, That, in accordance with section 32(c), title III, Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act, the cost to grazing users in complying with requirements of a grazing permit or agreement may be considered in determining the annual grazing fee on National Grasslands or land utilization projects if it has not been used in establishing the grazing base value.
#### § 51.56 How will the construction cost for purposes of leasehold surrender interest value be determined?

After receiving the detailed construction report (and certification, if requested), from the concessioner, the Director will review the report, certification and other information as appropriate to determine that the reported construction cost is consistent with the construction cost approved by the Director in advance of the construction and that all costs included in the construction cost are eligible direct or indirect costs as defined in this part. The construction cost determined by the Director will be the final determination of construction cost for purposes of the leasehold surrender interest value in the related capital improvement unless the concessioner requests arbitration of the construction cost under § 51.57. The Director may at any time review a construction cost determination (subject to arbitration under § 51.57) if the Director has reason to believe that it was based on false, misleading or incomplete information.

[66 FR 35083, July 3, 2001]