alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
•"i:PARTMENTOF 

SERVED: NOVEMBER 3,2010 ': :A,?^JSPORTATION 

:.'iriOPERATiOi\iS . 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS /Hig MQy _q A 9' 10 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

MARY WOOTEN 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09EA0010 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2009-0077 

NOTICE OF PREHEARING CONFERENCE 

A Prehearing Telephone Conference is hereby scheduled on November 19, 2010, at 

9:30 a.m.. Eastern Time. 

All parties should be prepared to discuss all issues and facts at issue. All documents that 

have been exchanged and that have not already been provided to the Judge should be furnished 

to him by November 8, 2010. 

Pursuant to Section 556 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 556(c)(8), each 

party shall be represented by someone who has authority to negotiate concerning resolution of all 

issues in controversy. 

SO ORDERED. 

Ronnie A. Yodi 

Chief Administrative 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP09EA0010 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

AMENDED SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Robert H. Waldman, Respondent's Counsel 

113RidgleyAve. 

Annapolis, MD 21401 

TEL: 410-268-5050 

FAX: 410-269-1544 

Mary Wooten, Respondent 

3851 Old Solomons Island Road 

Harwood, MD 20776 

Christian L. Lewerenz, Complainant's Counsel 

AttoiAey, Office of the Regional Counsel, EAL-7 

Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3273 

FAX: 718-995-5699 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder, Chief Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20, Room El 2-320 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2142 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the followiiig address: Fedaal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000, Washingt6n, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

- 2 -
#### Andrew Suffern and others, *Respondents, v.*Lewis M. Smith and John L. Bacon, *Appellants*.

Judgment reversed, referee discharged, new trial granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by

Learned, P. J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>     5
<CIK>         0000700764
<NAME>        New Environmental Technologies

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                              94
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      94
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            22818
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2620
<OTHER-SE>                                      (25344)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        94
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1612
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (1612)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (1612)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.00)


</TABLE>
See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“W hen denying relief, the court m ay hand down an opinion but 1

is not required to do so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and m em orandum opinions).

NUMBER 13-08-00317-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE SCOGGINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1

Relator, Scoggins Construction Company, Inc., filed a petition for writ of mandamus

in the above cause on May 20, 2008. Through this original proceeding, relator challenges

the trial court’s order of April 2, 2008, denying relator’s motion for leave to join third-party

defendants and to designate responsible third parties. The Court requested and received

a response from the real party in interest, Mercedes Independent School District.
2

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, which is available only when a trial court has

clearly abused its discretion and the relator lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. See In

re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding)

(citing Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex. 1992)); see also In re Team Rocket,

L.P., 51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 945, 2008 Tex. LEXIS 501, *2 (Tex. May 23, 2008) (orig.

proceeding).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus

and response thereto, is of the opinion that relator has not shown itself entitled to the relief

sought. See TEX. R.CIV.P. 37, 38; In re Unitec Elevator Servs. Co., 178 S.W.3d 53, 64-66

(Tex. App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, orig. proceeding); In re Martin, 147 S.W.3d 453, 458-

59 (Tex. App.–Beaumont 2004, orig. proceeding); In re Arthur Andersen LLP, 121 S.W.3d

471, 485-86 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, the

petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). 

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and 

filed this 30th day of June, 2008.
#### § 69.155 Measurement requirements.

Except as otherwise required by this subpart, the measurement requirements under the Standard Regulatory Measurement System in subpart C of this part apply to the measurement of vessels under this subpart.

[CGD 87-015b, 54 FR 37657, Sept. 12, 1989, as amended by USCG-2011-0522, 81 FR 18731, Mar. 31, 2016]
<PAGE>
                                                                  Exhibit 23.1

             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report dated February 21, 2003, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements included in this Annual Report of Nam Tai Electronics, Inc.
and subsidiaries on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2002. We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration
Statements and Prospectus of Nam Tai Electronics, Inc. on Form S-8 (File Nos.
333-73954, 333-27761, 333-58466, and 333-76940) and the Registration Statement
and Prospectus of Nam Tai Electronics, Inc. on Form F-3 (File No. 333-58468).

/s/ Grant Thornton
-------------------
Grant Thornton


Hong Kong
June 10, 2003
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DANIEL CASEY,

Petitioner

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRENDAN PATRICK YOUNG,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 10 MM 2020

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 2nd day of June , 2020, the Petition for Review is DENIED.
<PAGE>   1
                         SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned, constitutes and
appoints JOSEPH HINES as his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent
with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him and his name, place
and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K for
fiscal year ended July 31, 2000, for filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission by Zila, Inc., a Delaware corporation, together with any and all
amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same with all exhibits thereto,
and all documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, granting to such attorney-in-fact and agent, full power and
authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and
necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully and to all intents and
purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming
that such attorney-in-fact and agent, may lawfully do or cause to be done by
virtue hereof.

     DATED:  October 27, 2000

                                             /s/ Bradley C. Anderson
                                             --------------------------
                                             BRADLEY C. ANDERSON

STATE OF ARIZONA    )
                    )
County of Maricopa  )

     On the 27th day of October, 2000, before me, the undersigned Notary
Public, personally appeared BRADLEY C. ANDERSON, known to be the person whose
name Is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that he executed
the same for the purposes therein contained.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.

                                             /s/ Janice L. Backus
                                             --------------------------
                                             Notary Public


My commission expires:
[seal of Janice L. Backus]

                                       EXHIBIT
                                        24-B
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority        Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

# Board Actions

## Actions taken during the week ending April 21, 2012

----

Forms            Forms -- final Board review to extend with revision the Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices (FR 2018) and the Senior Financial Officer Survey (FR 2023).            -Approved, April 16, 2012                        Forms -- initial Board review to extend without revision the Suspicious Activity Report (FR 2230).            -Proposed, April 16, 2012            Regulations and Policies            Volcker Rule Conformance Period -- issuance of a policy statement clarifying the conformance period for an entity covered under the so-called Volcker Rule of the Dodd-Frank Act.            -Approved, April 16, 2012            Enforcement            Bank of New York Mellon, New York, New York -- issuance of a consent cease and desist order and assessment of a civil money penalty against the bank regarding allegations that it breached certain representations and warranties made in connection with its participation in the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility.            -Announced, April 16, 2012                        Citizens Republic Bancorp, Inc., Flint, Michigan, and Citizens Bank -- written agreement dated July 28, 2010, terminated April 17, 2012.            -Announced, April 19, 2012            
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority    Applications and reports received:
§ 56.90-10 Threaded piping (modifies 135.5). ( a ) Any compound used in threaded joints must be suitable for the service conditions and must not react unfavorably with either the service fluid or the piping materials.
( b ) Threaded joints that are to be seal welded must be made up without any thread compound.
[CGFR 68-82, 33 FR 18843, Dec. 18, 1968, as amended by USCG-2003-16630, 73 FR 65185, Oct. 31, 2008]
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: 12
Federal Reserve Bank of: San Francisco

## Filings received during the week ending February 11, 2012

|Filer                        | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          | End of Comment Period                             
|---------------------------- | ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------
|FIRST PACTRUST BANCORP, INC. | * 4c8* 3A1    | First PacTrust Bancorp, Inc., Chula Vista, California, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of Beach Business Bank, Manhattan Beach, California, pursuant to section 3(a)(1) of the BHC Act, and 2)to retain 100 percent control of Pacific Trust Bank, fsb,Chula Vista, California, and thereby engage in operating a nonbank thrift subsidiary, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(4) of Regulation Y. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:02/21/2012
|Newspaper:                   | Not available
|Federal Register:            | 02/21/2012   

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location                     | RSSDID  | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|------------------------------------------ | ------- | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|FARMERS & MRCH BK, LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA  | 871769  | 08/01/2011 | 01/23/2012     | S         | Large Bank 
|OAK VALLEY CMNTY BK, OAKDALE, CALIFORNIA   | 1864197 | 06/27/2011 | 01/27/2012     | S         | Int Sm Bank
|PACIFIC PREMIER BK, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA | 431172  | 10/11/2011 | 02/07/2012     | S         | Int Sm Bank

## 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
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, May 15, 1995 (66), Para 66.14 Providing for the Consideration of H.R. 535]
[Page 700]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.66.14  providing for the consideration of h.r. 535

  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ, by direction of the Committee on Rules, called up the 
following resolution (H. Res. 144):

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 535) to direct the Secretary of the Interior 
     to convey the Corning National Fish Hatchery to the State of 
     Arkansas. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
     with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall 
     not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
     chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Resources. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
     for amendment under the five-minute rule. The bill and the 
     amendment recommended by the Committee on Resources now 
     printed in the bill shall be considered as read. At the 
     conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the 
     Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
     such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 
     amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit. 

  When said resolution was considered.
  After debate,
  On motion of Mrs. WALDHOLTZ, the previous question was ordered on the 
resolution to its adoption or rejection and under the operation thereof, 
the resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider the vote whereby said resolution was agreed to 
was, by unanimous consent, laid on the table.
```
#### § 1242.20 Highway grade crossings (accounts XX-17-22 and XX-18-22).

Separate running and switching common expenses according to distribution of the running and switching portions only of common expense accounts listed in § 1242.10, Administration—Track (account XX-19-02).
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: 11
Federal Reserve Bank of: Dallas

## Filings received during the week ending December 25, 2010

|Filer                                     | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        | End of Comment Period                              
|----------------------------------------- | -------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|CONNEMARA BANCORP, INC.                   | * 3A1          | Connemara Bancorp, Inc., Dallas, Texas, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of First Amherst Bancshares, Inc., Amherst, Texas, and indirectly acquire First National Bank, Amherst, Texas.                                                                                                                       | Newspaper:01/10/2011Federal Register:01/10/2011    
|Newspaper:                                | 01/10/2011    
|Federal Register:                         | 01/10/2011    
|GRUPO FINANCIERO BANCRECER, S.A., DE C.V. | 4c8            | Grupo Financiero Banorte, S.A.B. de C.V., Mexico City, Mexico to acquire 100 percent of Ixe Grupo Financiero, S.A.B. de C.V., Cuauhtemoc, Mexico and indirectly acquire Ixe Securities, LLC, New York, New York and thereby continue to engage in securities brokerage activities pursuant to Section 225.28(b)(7)(i) of Regulation Y. | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:01/11/2011
|Newspaper:                                | Not applicable
|Federal Register:                         | 01/11/2011    

## 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
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 11a0318n.06

No. 09-3791

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

RONALD WRIGHT,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Before: MARTIN and SUTTON, Circuit Judges; GRAHAM, District Judge.*

SUTTON, Circuit Judge. Ronald Wright challenges his classification as an armed career

criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Relying on binding precedent, we affirm.

Wright pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. In calculating his sentence,

the district court determined (1) that he was subject to the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18

U.S.C. § 924(e), requiring a statutoryminimum of 180 months, and (2) that his guidelines range was

180–210 months. The court imposed a 180-month sentence. 

The Honorable James L. Graham, Senior United States District Judge for the Southern *

District of Ohio, sitting by designation.
No. 09-3791

United States v. Wright

On appeal, Wright argues that neither of his two fourth-degree burglary convictions under

Ohio law, see Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2911.12(A)(4), amounted to a “violent felony” under ACCA. 

Wright did not raise the objection below, and accordingly plain error applies.

No plain error occurred because there was no error. In United States v. Skipper, 552 F.3d

489, 492–93 (6th Cir. 2009), we held that a conviction under the same Ohio law amounts to a “crime

of violence” under the career offender designation in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. See also United States v.

McBee, 364 F. App’x 991 (6th Cir. 2010) (same). Because, as relevant here, “ we treat a‘crime of

violence’ under § 4B1.1(a) of the guidelines the same as a ‘violent felony’ under [ACCA],” United

States v. Ford, 560 F.3d 420, 421 (6th Cir. 2009), Skipper governs this case. 

In asking us to overrule (or sidestep) Skipper, Wright asks us to do what we cannot. Only

the en banc process, a material intervening Supreme Court decision or a relevant change to the

guidelines or ACCA would permit us to override Skipper. See Sykes v. Anderson, 625 F.3d 294, 319

(6th Cir. 2010); see also 6th Cir. R. 206(c). Nor does Chambers v. United States, 555 U.S. 122

(2009), decided the same day as Skipper, count as intervening Supreme Court precedent. Chambers

asked whether a statutory offense could contain multiple categories of offenses, and Wright does not

argue that Ohio Rev. Code § 2911.12(A)(4) presents a categorization problem. His complaint about 

Skipper goes to its application of Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (2008), which the Supreme

Court decided nine months before Skipper.

- 2 -
No. 09-3791

United States v. Wright

Because the district court properly sentenced Wright to the statutory minimum sentence, his

reasonableness challenge is also meritless. See United States v. Higgins, 557 F.3d 381, 398 (6th Cir.

2009).

For these reasons, we affirm.

- 3 -