alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 27, 2018

No. 04-16-00721-CV

402 LONE STAR PROPERTY, LLC and Craig Otto,

Appellants

v.

Barry L. BRADFORD,

Appellee

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-08653

Honorable Gloria Saldana, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

The panel has considered the appellants’ motion for rehearing and the motion is 

DENIED.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 27th day of February, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
#### § 90.10-23 Motorboat.

This term means any vessel indicated in Column 5 of table 90.05-1(a) 65 feet in length or less which is propelled by machinery (including steam). The length shall be measured from end to end over the deck excluding sheer. This term includes a boat temporarily or permanently equipped with a detachable motor. For the purpose of this subchapter, motorboats are included under the term “vessel” unless specifically noted otherwise. The various classes of motorboats are as follows:

Class A—Any motorboat less than 16 feet in length.

Class 1—Any motorboat 16 feet or over and less than 26 feet in length.

Class 2—Any motorboat 26 feet or over and less than 40 feet in length.

Class 3—Any motorboat 40 feet or over and not more than 65 feet in length.

[CGFR 65-50, 30 FR 16970, Dec. 30, 1965, as amended by CGD 95-028, 62 FR 51205, Sept. 30, 1997]
#### Adeline M. Perigo, *Respondent, v.*Catherine Dowdall.

Order appealed from affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:
Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 1
Federal Reserve Bank of: Boston

## Filings received during the week ending February 26, 2011

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:
Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1650

To provide for the liquidation or reliquidation of certain entries in accordance

with the results of an administrative review by the International Trade

Administration.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 16, 1995

Mr. ROMERO-BARCELO ́ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To provide for the liquidation or reliquidation of certain

entries in accordance with the results of an administrative review by the International Trade Administration.

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF ENTRIES.

4 (a) LIQUIDATION OR RELIQUIDATION OF ENTRIES.—

5 Notwithstanding sections 514 and 520 of the Tariff Act

6 of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514 and 1520), and any other provi7 sion of law, the United States Customs Service shall liq8 uidate or reliquidate those entry numbers made at New

9 York, New York, which are listed in subsection (c), in ac-
2

•HR 1650 IH

1 cordance with the final results of the administrative re2 view, covering the period from May 1, 1984, through

3 March 31, 1985, undertaken by the International Trade

4 Administration of the Department of Commerce for such

5 entries (case number A–580–008).

6 (b) PAYMENT OF AMOUNTS OWED.—Any amounts

7 owed by the United States pursuant to the liquidation or

8 reliquidation of an entry under subsection (a) shall be paid

9 by the Customs Service within 90 days after such liquida10 tion or reliquidation.

11 (c) ENTRY LIST.—The entries referred to in sub12 section (a) are the following:

Entry Number Date of Entry

84–4426808 ................................................................. August 29, 1984

84–4427823 ................................................................. September 4, 1984

84–4077985 ................................................................. July 25, 1984

84–4080859 ................................................................. August 3, 1984

84–4080817 ................................................................. August 3, 1984

84–4077723 ................................................................. August 1, 1984

84–4075194 ................................................................. July 10, 1984

84–4076481 ................................................................. July 17, 1984

84–4080930 ................................................................. August 9, 1984.

Æ
§ 62.50-1 General. ( a ) Where automated systems are provided to replace specific personnel in the control and observation of the engineering plant and spaces, or reduce overall crew requirements, the arrangements must make sure that under all sailing conditions, including maneuvering, the safety of the vessel is equal to that of the same vessel with the entire plant under fully attended direct manual supervision.
( b ) Coast Guard acceptance of automated systems to replace specific personnel or to reduce overall crew requirements is predicated upon— ( 1 ) The capabilities of the automated systems;
( 2 ) The combination of the personnel, equipment, and systems necessary to ensure the safety of the vessel, personnel, and environment in all sailing conditions, including maneuvering;
( 3 ) The ability of the crew to perform all operational evolutions, including emergencies such as fire or control or monitoring system failure;
( 4 ) A planned maintenance program including routine maintenance, inspection, and testing to ensure the continued safe operation of the vessel; and
( 5 ) The automated system's demonstrated reliability during an initial trial period, and its continuing reliability. Note 1 to paragraph ( b
)(5):
The cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, (OCMI) also determines the need for more or less equipment depending on the vessel characteristics, route, or trade.
( c ) Equipment provided to replace specific personnel or to reduce overall crew requirements that proves unsafe or unreliable in the judgment of the cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, must be replaced or repaired or vessel manning will be modified to compensate for the equipment inadequacy.
[CGD 81-030, 53 FR 17838, May 18, 1988, as amended by USCG-2020-0634, 89 FR 50195, June 12, 2024]
98-2357.

#### State v. Ulis.

Lucas App. No. L-95-141. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, May 15, 1995 (66), Para 66.9 Greens Creek Land Exchange]
[Page 699]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.66.9  greens creek land exchange

  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 
1266) to provide for the exchange of lands within Admiralty Island 
National Monument, and for other purposes; as amended.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. FUNDERBURK, recognized Mr. YOUNG of 
Alaska and Mr. ABERCROMBIE, each for 20 minutes.
  After debate,
  The question being put, viva voce,
  Will the House suspend the rules and pass said bill, as amended?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. FUNDERBURK, announced that two-thirds of 
the Members present had voted in the affirmative.
  So, two-thirds of the Members present having voted in favor thereof, 
the rules were suspended and said bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider the vote whereby the rules were suspended and 
said bill, as amended, was passed was, by unanimous consent, laid on the 
table.
  Ordered, That the Clerk request the concurrence of the Senate in said 
bill.
```
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 3
Federal Reserve Bank of: Philadelphia

## Filings received during the week ending April 9, 2011

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
# C_2012303EN.01000901.xml

| 6.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/9

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 May 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Constanța, Romania) — Ministerul Administrației și Internelor, Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române, Inspectoratul de Poliție al Județului Tulcea v Corpul Național al Polițiștilor — Biroul Executiv Central

(Case C-134/12) (1)

1

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms - Validity of national legislation imposing salary reductions on a number of categories of civil servants - Failure to implement European Union law - Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court of Justice)

2012/C 303/18

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Constanța

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Ministerul Administrației și Internelor, Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române, Inspectoratul de Poliție al Județului Tulcea

Appellants:

Respondent: Corpul Național al Polițiștilor — Biroul Executiv Central

Respondent:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Curtea de Apel Constanța — Interpretation of Articles 17(1), 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Interpretation of Article 15(3) of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Admissibility of national legislation imposing salary reductions on a number of categories of civil servants — Infringement of the right of property and of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly has no jurisdiction with regard to the reference for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Constanța (Romania), made by decision of 8 February 2012.

---

(1)  OJ C 138, 12.5.2012.

1

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

United States of America,

Plaintiff(s),

v. Case No. 2:15−cr−20382−VAR−MKM

Hon. Victoria A. Roberts

Paul Nicoletti,

Defendant(s).

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that a copy of the Notice(s) of Appeal filed in this case and this Certificate

of Service was served upon:

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Potter Stewart U.S. Courthouse

100 East Fifth Street, Fifth Floor

Cincinnati, OH 45202−3988

the defendant(s), and all attorneys of record, by electronic means or first class U.S. mail, on

December 13, 2022.

KINIKIA D. ESSIX, CLERK OF COURT

By: s/ Tracy A Thompson 

Deputy Clerk

Dated: December 13, 2022

Case 2:15-cr-20382-VAR-MKM ECF No. 262, PageID.4355 Filed 12/13/22 Page 1 of 1
#### § 61.10-1 Scope.

All pressure vessels aboard ships, mobile offshore drilling units, and barges are subject to periodic inspection.

[CGD 68-82, 33 FR 18890, Dec. 18, 1968, as amended by CGD 73-251, 43 FR 56801, Dec. 4, 1978; CGD 95-012, 60 FR 48050, Sept. 18, 1995]
#### Henry A. Barnum, *Appellant, v.*Oscar Tomagno, *Respondent.*

Motion for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs. Opinion by

Daniels, J.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 10, 2007)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 37419]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3373]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 37419]]

                Presidential Determination No. 2007-23 of June 28, 2007

                
Presidential Determination to Waive Military 
                Coup-Related Provision of the Foreign Operations, 
                Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations 
                Act, 2006, as Carried Forward Under the Revised 
                Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007, With 
                Respect to Pakistan

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the 
                Constitution and laws of the United States, including 
                section 534(j) of the Foreign Operations, Export 
                Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 
                2006 (the ``Act'')(Public Law 109-102), as carried 
                forward under the Revised Continuing Appropriations 
                Resolution, 2007 (Public Law 110-5)(the ``Continuing 
                Resolution''), and Public Law 107-57, as amended, I 
                hereby determine and certify, with respect to Pakistan, 
                that a waiver of section 508 of the Act, as carried 
                forward under the Continuing Resolution:

(a) would facilitate the transition to democratic rule in Pakistan; and

(b) is important to United States efforts to respond to, deter, or prevent 
acts of international terrorism.

                Accordingly, I hereby waive, with respect to Pakistan, 
                section 508 of such Act, as carried forward by the 
                Continuing Resolution.

                You are authorized and directed to transmit this 
                determination to the Congress and to publish it in the 
                Federal Register.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, June 28, 2007.

[FR Doc. 07-3373
Filed 7-09-07; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4710-10
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7212

THOMAS WOODROW RICE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RICKY JACKSON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District

Judge. (CA-97-289-3-MU)

Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: April 29, 1998

Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Woodrow Rice, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1997). The district court held that Appellant failed to state

a claim upon which relief may be granted. Rice v. Jackson, No. CA97-289-3-MU (W.D.N.C. July 30, 1997). We agree that the this claim

should be dismissed but based on Appellant's failure to exhaust his

state court remedies. As such, the dismissal is without prejudice.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and the dismiss

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 4.11-10 Witness fees and allowances.

Witness fees and allowances are paid in accordance with 46 CFR 5.401.

[CGD 79-080, 45 FR 2046, Jan. 10, 1980, as amended by CGD 96-041, 61 FR 50726, Sept. 27, 1996]
Exhibit 32.1 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of GSI Commerce, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report on Form10-K for the period ended January 3, 2004 (the “Report”) 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 result of operations of the Company. 

 

By: /s/ Michael G. Rubin

Michael G. Rubin 

President and Chief Executive Officer 

 

March 16, 2004 

 

By: /s/ Jordan M. Copland

Jordan M. Copland 

Chief Financial Officer 

 

March 16, 2004 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### § 1112.3 Default for failure to comply with schedule; effect of default.

If a party fails to comply with the schedule for submission of verified statements, or any other requirements established by the modified procedure decision, that party will be deemed to be in default and to have waived any further participation in the proceeding. Thereafter, the proceeding may be disposed of without notice to and without participation by parties in default.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5
       
<S>                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>   DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>        SEP-30-1995
<CASH> 111,834             
<SECURITIES> 0
<RECEIVABLES> 0     
<ALLOWANCES>       0
<INVENTORY>         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>    0
<PP&E> 1,711,000      <F1>
<DEPRECIATION>     0 <F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS> 1,838,403    
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>    0
<BONDS> 1,348,537    <F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>    0
<PREFERRED>         0
<COMMON>       0
<OTHER-SE>          0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 2,002,993
<SALES>             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES> 581,166    <F4>
<CGS>               0
<TOTAL-COSTS> 628,725        <F5>
<OTHER-EXPENSES> 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>     0
<INCOME-TAX>        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING> 0
<DISCONTINUED>      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>     0
<CHANGES>           0
<NET-INCOME>    (47,559)  
<EPS-PRIMARY>       0
<EPS-DILUTED>       0

<FN>
<F1>   "PP&E" REPRESENTS  REAL ESTATE HELD FOR SALE
<F2>   "DEPRECIATION" IS INCLUDED IN "PP&E"
<F3> "BONDS" REPRESENTS MORTGAGE PAYABLE
<F4>   "TOTAL REVENUES" REPRESENTS RENTAL, INTEREST, AND OTHER
INCOME
<F5>   "TOTAL COSTS" REPRESENTS TOTAL EXPENSES
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 4
Federal Reserve Bank of: Cleveland

## Filings received during the week ending May 1, 2010

|Filer                     | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    | End of Comment Period                             
|------------------------- | ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------
|HOMETOWN BANCSHARES, INC. | CIC           | Notice of Change in Bank Control filed by Hometown Bancshares, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan (Tammy Rae Waggoner, Trustee), Middlebourne, WV to retain control of 10.77 percent of the outstanding voting shares of Hometown Bancshares, Inc., Middlebourne, WV. | Newspaper:05/11/2010Federal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:                | 05/11/2010   
|Federal Register:         | Not available

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 19

- 00202

- CR

JONATHAN EUGENE MITCHELL, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 276th District Court Marion County, Texas Trial Court No. F15085

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.2 O R D E R Our review of the reporter’s record in this case indicates that it contains “sensitive data” as that phrase is defined in Rule 9.10 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 9.10(a). Sensitive data includes “a birth date, a home address, and the name of any person who was a minor at the time the offense was committed.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 9.10(a)(3). Volumes one, three, and four of the reporter’s record contain the name of a person who was a minor at the time the offense was committed. Rule 9.10(b) states, “Unless a court orders otherwise, an electronic or paper filing with the court, including the contents of any appendices, must not contain sensitive data.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 9.10(b). Rule 9.10(g) provides, “A court may also order that a document be filed under seal in paper form or electronic form, without redaction.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 9.10(g). Therefore, because volumes one, three, and four of the reporter’s record conta in sensitive data, we order the clerk of this Court or her appointee, in accordance with Rule 9.10(g), to seal the electronically filed volumes one, three, and four of the reporter’s record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT
Date: February 25, 2020