alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed, November 28, 2018

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 18

- 01017

- CV

____________ HDG, LTD D/B/A HUNTO N DISTRIBUTION , Appellant

V.

KELLY BLASCHKE , Appellee

On Appeal from the 55th District Court Harris Cou nty, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2018

- 38838



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due November 26, 2018

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the
record. The record has not been filed with th e court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Gina Jackson , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 10 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
TELEGEN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES' AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,166,657
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,784
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    173,841
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,994,594
<PP&E>                                       1,993,341
<DEPRECIATION>                                 328,967
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,727,322
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,292,533
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    10,399,318
<OTHER-SE>                                  (6,308,155)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,727,322
<SALES>                                         23,700
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               541,056
<CGS>                                           18,083
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   86,695
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,869,211
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             146,650
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,115,026)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (5,115,026)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (5,115,026)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.16)


</TABLE>
#### Lloyd Donald GREESON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-1216.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 27, 1971.

Engel & Halpern, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Bruce L. Scheiner, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ., and SACK, MARTIN, Associate Judge.

PEARSON, Judge.

The appellant entered a plea of guilty to a charge of second degree murder and was adjudged guilty and sentenced to life im*42prisonment on November 3, 1964. On January 28, 1970, the appellant filed a motion to vacate judgment and sentence pursuant CrPR 1.850, 33 F.S.A. The grounds alleged in the motion are (1) that he was denied the assistance of counsel and, (2) that his plea of guilty was not voluntarily entered, but was a result of coercion by the police. The trial court appointed counsel to represent the movant and directed that an evidentiary hearing be held. The court appointed counsel took depositions of suggested witnesses and filed a summary of the statements of these witnesses. On the day of the evidentiary hearing, the State presented a motion to strike the CrPR 1.-850 petition upon the ground that the record conclusively refuted the allegations of the petition. The trial judge granted the motion and struck the motion for relief pursuant to CrPR 1.850. This appeal is from that order.

After having appointed an attorney who had exercized energy and diligence in order to determine the factual background under which the plea of guilty was made and the, attorney having filed a summary of the statements of the witnesses, the trial court should have considered the depositions, as reflected by the summary, as an amendment to the petition. Thus viewed, the State’s motion to strike should not have been granted, although it might have been sustained if directed to the petition as originally filed. The record, as supplemented by the depositions, does not refute the allegations of irregularity in acceptance of the appellant’s guilty plea when viewed in the light of the sworn testimony of the witnesses contained in the depositions. The court should have proceeded with the evidentiary hearing in order to make a factual determination of the allegations of the motion.

We therefore reverse the order striking appellant’s petition for relief pursuant to CrPR 1.850, and remand the cause with directions to conduct an evidentiary hearing upon the motion. Cf. Flores v. Wainwright, Fla.App.1970, 240 So.2d 816; O’Malley v. Wainwright, Fla.App.1970, 237 So.2d 813.

Reversed and remanded.
Policy Statement on the Implementation of the 

Notification and Federal Employee 

Antidiscrimination and Retaliation 

Act of 2002 (No FEAR Act), Pub. L. No. 107–174 

The Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 

(No FEAR Act), as amended by the Elijah E. Cummings Federal Employee Antidiscrimination 

Act of 2020, requires Federal agencies to keep their employees, former employees, and 

applicants for employment informed of their antidiscrimination and whistleblower protections; 

post quarterly statistics on their websites; and train all employees regarding the rights and 

remedies to which they are entitled under the law. Federal agencies are required to submit 

annual reports to Congress demonstrating their compliance with the law not later than 180 days 

after the end of each fiscal year. 

It is the U.S. Department of Transportation’s policy to prohibit employment discrimination, 

interference, or retaliation for protected disclosures. I fully support the principles of the No 

FEAR Act, and I am committed to providing a workplace environment that is welcoming to all. 

Our Departmental Office of Civil Rights and Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration 

are responsible for ensuring proper implementation of the No FEAR Act. I expect all 

departmental organizations and leaders to support these offices and to champion these important 

responsibilities. You may obtain further information regarding the No FEAR Act by contacting 

our Departmental Office of Civil Rights for assistance or by visiting 

https://www.transportation.gov/civil-rights. 

Pete Buttigieg 

June 9, 2022
**Exhibit 32.4****QUEPASA CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES****Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted****Pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**I, Michael D. Matte, the Chief Financial Officer of Quepasa Corporation (the “Company”), certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:(1) This Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of the Company for the quarterly period ended March31, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and (2) That the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.     Dated: November 16, 2007   /s/ Michael D. Matte       Name: Michael D. Matte  Title: Executive Vice President    And Chief Financial Officer
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2771 

To allow additional individuals to enroll in standalone dental plans offered 

through Federal Exchanges. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 12, 2023 

Ms. HASSAN (for herself and Mr. MARSHALL) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To allow additional individuals to enroll in standalone dental 

plans offered through Federal Exchanges. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Increasing Access to 

5 Dental Insurance Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. STANDALONE DENTAL PLANS. 

7 Section 1321 of the Patient Protection and Afford8 able Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18041) is amended by adding 

9 at the end the following: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 2771 IS

1 ‘‘(f) AVAILABILITY OF STANDALONE DENTAL

2 PLANS.—The Secretary may not restrict any qualified in3 dividual from enrolling in a plan described in section 

4 1311(d)(2)(B)(ii) offered through an Exchange estab5 lished pursuant to subsection (c) on the basis of such 

6 qualified individual not being also enrolled in a qualified 

7 health plan offered through the Exchange.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
**MFS Test Section Video Script**

**YouTube Information:**

Title: Virtual Hydraulics Lab Tour – MFS Test Section

Description: An overview about how measurements taken from physical experiments conducted in the test section of the MFS are used to calibrate computation fluid dynamics (CFD) models.

**Script:**

Full-scale CFD experiments involving existing or proposed bridge foundations are calibrated using the flume. This form of analysis allows researchers to study the performance of the proposed hydraulic design. 3D printed and laser-cut parts are used together to create a physical representation of the site of interest. After the computational model is verified through comparison with measurements in the physical tests, full-scale CFD experiments are conducted.

**508 Caption Description:**

The video shows a computer simulation of a bridge site undergoing a large flood event. The camera starts at a high altitude and a far distance showing a roughly mile-long reach both up and downstream. A darker rectangular section surrounding the bridge and river depicts the outer limits of the three-dimensional CFD model, which obtains its boundary condition data from the larger two-dimensional hydraulic model of the site. In the upper corner of the animation, a smaller video shows the actual bridge model mounted in the MFS. As the two videos play the computer animation slowly flies in towards the bridge, and large moving particles are revealed that show the path and speed of the flow discharge through the main and overflow channels. The particles converge and speed through the bridge opening and are distributed on the other side. Meanwhile, in the MFS video water approaches the model and ripples are visible in the water’s surface. The camera reveals multiple different angles of the model and pans back and forth. As the computer animation continues to zoom in on the bridge model, the particles vanish and varying colors show the range of shear stresses on the bed surface.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

GARY KING, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Civil Action No. 04-374 Erie

v. )

)

JOANNE B. BARNHART, )

Commissioner of Social Security, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Plaintiff’s complaint was received by the Clerk of Court on August 24, 2004, and

was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and

recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and

Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. 

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 5], filed on

September 2, 2005, recommended that the Plaintiff’s complaint [Doc. No. 1] be

dismissed for failure to prosecute. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the

date of service to file objections. Service was made on Plaintiff by certified mail and on

Defendant. Objections were filed by Plaintiff on September 8, 2005. After de novo

review of the petition and documents in the case, together with the Report and

Recommendation and objections thereto, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 22nd day of September, 2005;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court declines to adopt the Report and 

Recommendation [Doc. No. 5] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on September 2, 2005,

as the opinion of the Court. 

 s/ Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cm: All parties of record

Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 1:04-cv-00374-SJM Document 8 Filed 09/22/05 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 198 (Tuesday, October 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 53350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27078]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-33,792]


Label Art/Short Run Labels, Inc. Linthicum Heights, MD; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on September 8, 1997 in response to a worker petition 
which was filed on behalf of workers and former workers at Label Art/
Short Run Labels, Incorporated, located in Linthicum Heights, Maryland 
(TA-W-33,792).
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 26th day of September 1997.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-27078 Filed 10-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
11 TH C OURT OF A PPEALS

E ASTLAND

, T EXAS

J UDGMENT

Carol Johnene Morris, * From the 142nd District

Court of Midland County,

Trial Court No. TX13106

.

Vs. No. 11

- 13

- 00205

- CV * August 8, 2013

Midland Central Appraisal District

, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Willson , J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that the appeal

should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, in accordance with this

court ’ s opinion, the appeal is dis missed.
#### Naamon JONES, Petitioner, v. Louie WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Adult Corrections, State of Florida, Respondent.

No. 70-279.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 8, 1970.

Habeas corpus denied.
#### Charles TOMPKINS v. Karl SCHEMPT et al.

No. 62128.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 12, 1978.

In re: Charles Tompkins, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Allen.

Denied.
#### James MEEKS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 39853.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 23, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 21, 1970.

Certiorari denied.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
#### Jewell C. CURTIS, Appellant, v. Kenneth A. CURTIS, Appellee.

No. 70-700.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 19, 1971.

Truett & Watkins, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Gibbons, Tucker, McEwen, Smith, Cofer & Taub, Tampa, for appellee.

LILES, Acting Chief Judge.

Appellant and appellee were divorced in the Circuit Court for Polk County. Temporary custody of the three minor children of the parties was awarded to Mr. Curtis, and Mrs. Curtis was denied any special equity in Mr. Curtis’ property. Mrs. Curtis appeals from the order awarding custody and denying her a special equity, and Mr. Curtis cross-appeals from the ruling ordering him to pay attorneys’ fees, alleging the fees are excessive.

We recognize the general rule in Florida that the mother is normally preferred as custodian of young children. Kelly v. Kelly, Fla.App.1964, 163 So.2d 498. However, this does not mean that the mother is *always*awarded custody. When, as in this case, the chancellor after hearing the evidence awards custody to the father, and the record supports that decision, this court will not interfere. We note that this is a temporary custody order and therefore subject to modification at a later date.

As to the remaining points on appeal, the record shows that Mrs. Curtis failed to demonstrate a special equity in Mr. Curtis’ property, and the attorneys’ fees while high are not excessive.

The chancellor did not abuse his discretion in this case, and the judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

HOBSON and MANN, JJ., concur.
#### The TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Johnny Lee BREWER and Booker T. Rice, Appellees.

No. 70-821.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 11, 1971.

Rehearing Denied June 11, 1971.

Carey, Dwyer, Austin, Cole & Selwood, and Edward A. Perse, Miami, for appellant.

Kates & Ress, and Roland H. Gomez, North Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, BARKDULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. Mason, Fla.App.1969, 218 So.2d 185; and American Casualty Co. of Reading, Pa. v. Castellanos, Fla.App.1967, 203 So .2d 26.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****AIDS knowledge and attitudes...: provisional data from the National Health Interview Survey.**
 
 
**Month(s) Covered
** 
**Publication  Date
 
1987,  August
 
1987
November
1987,  September
1987,  October
1988,  June
1988,  July
1988,  August
 
1988
January
March
September
October
December
1988,  September
1988,  October and November
1988,  December
1989,  January-March
1989,  April-June
 
1989
January
April
May
August
November
1989,  July-September
1989,  October-December
1990,  January-March
1990,  April-June
 
1990
March
June
September
December
1991,  January-March
 
1991
August
1991
 
1993
January
1992
 
1994
February
 
 
SuDoc Number:HE 20.6209/3:
Item Number:0500-E (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000910901
 
February 6, 2018******
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (This schedule  contians summary financial  information  extracted from the
Consolidated  Statements of Operations  for the year ended December 31, 1998 and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000906527
<NAME>                        Lady Luck Gaming Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000
<CURRENCY>                      USD
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                    1
<CASH>                           28,834
<SECURITIES>                     19,219
<RECEIVABLES>                     1,231
<ALLOWANCES>                        369
<INVENTORY>                         946
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 51,194
<PP&E>                          152,256
<DEPRECIATION>                   31,352
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  191,685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            18,701
<BONDS>                         176,584
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>            20,611
<PREFERRED>                           0
<COMMON>                             29
<OTHER-SE>                      (24,240)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    191,685
<SALES>                         144,079
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                157,184
<CGS>                            59,221
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    59,221
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 54,280
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    236
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               21,960
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  10,241
<INCOME-TAX>                         75
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              10,166
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                     10,166
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      1.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                      1.63

        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.3
                           CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                           ------------------------

                      TO THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                      -----------------------------------

                       OF SKYLANDS PARK MANAGEMENT, INC.
                       ---------------------------------


TO:  The Secretary of State
     State of New Jersey

     Pursuant to the provisions of Section 14A:9-2(4), Corporations, General of
the New Jersey Statutes, the undersigned corporation executes the following
Certificate of Amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation:

     1. The name of the corporation is Skylands Park Management, Inc.

     2. The following amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation was approved
by the directors of the corporation on November 18, 1993 and thereafter duly
adopted by the shareholders of the corporation on January 14, 1994:

     RESOLVED: That the number of authorized shares of common stock of the
     corporation be increased to 20,000,000 shares without par value; and that,
     in furtherance thereof, the proper officers of the corporation are hereby
     authorized, empowered and directed to file a Certificate of Amendment to
     the corporation's Certificate of Incorporation whereby the first sentence
     of ARTICLE IV shall be amended so as to read in full as follows: "The total
     authorized capital stock of the Corporation is Twenty Million Five Hundred
     Thousand (20,500,000) shares, consisting of Twenty Million (20,000,000)
     shares of common stock, no par value (the "Common Stock") and Five Hundred
     Thousand (500,000) shares of preferred stock, no par value (the "Preferred
     Stock")."

     3. The number of shares outstanding at the time of adoption of the
amendment was 1,978,571 shares of common stock without par value. The total
number of shares entitled to vote thereon was 1,978,571.

     4. The amendment was adopted by the shareholders of the corporation at a
meeting of such shareholders held on January 14, 1994 pursuant to due notice
thereof, at which a total of 1,214,448 shares (constituting a majority of the
issued and outstanding shares of the common stock of the Corporation) were
present in person or by proxy. A total of 1,167,948 shares voted for the
amendment, a total of 39,545 shares voted against the amendment, and a total of
6,955 shares abstained with respect to the amendment.
<PAGE>

Dated:  This 14th day of January, 1994

                                             SKYLANDS PARK MANAGEMENT, INC.


                                             By:
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Frederick A. Voight, Chairman