alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

At the signing today of the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America 

and the Government of the State of Qatar to Improve International Tax Compliance and to 

Implement FATCA (hereinafter the "Agreement"), the representatives of the United States of 

America and the State of Qatar wish to confirm their understanding ofthefollowing: 

1. The term "Financial Account" would include accounts maintained by Financial 

Institutions in accordance with the provisions ofDivision 3 of Chapter Four ofthe Law 

of Qatar Central Bank and the Regulation of Financial Institutions, issued by way ofLaw 

13 of2012. 

2. The term "Depository Account" would include deposit arrangements maintained in 

accordance with the provisions of Division 3 of Chapter Four of the Law of Qatar Central 

Bank and the Regulation of Financial Institutions, issued by way of Law 13 of2012. 

3. The term "deposit" would include deposits as defined in Article 1 of the Law of Qatar 

Central Bank and the Regulation of Financial Institutions, issued by way of Law 13 of 

2012. . 

4. The term "interest" in Article 2(2) (f) of the Agreement would include income from 

Depository Accounts, as defined in paragraph 2 above, paid or credited to, or in respect 

of, the account. 

5. The activities of the Qatar Central Securities Depository (QCSD) related to the 

registering of trades of securities listed on the Qatar Exchange would not cause it to be 

considered a Financial Institution. 

6. If a controlled entity otherwise described in subparagraph (A)(2) of Section I of Annex II 

issues bonds or sukuk in relation to the administration or management of a State agency 

or entity that satisfies the requirements of subparagraph A(l) of such section, such 

activity would generally be considered compliant with subparagraph (A)(2)(b) of such 

section. 

7. In the Arabic version of the Agreement, the term "Partner Jurisdiction" is translated as 

"~y!"JI UJ...JI" and the term "jurisdiction" is translated as '\.>-""~':1 1 ~". Generally, 

the term " (..)"Q~ ':II ~ " is used to refer to state and non-state entities that may be a 

party to agreements, and is distinct from the term "~~",which is the translation 

of the term "Competent Authority." 

Signed at Doha, Qatar, in duplicate, in the English and Arabic languages, this ih day of January, 

2015. 

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF 

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
Mr. Karl Brooks 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. EPA, Region VII 

901 North Fifth Street 

Kansas City, KS 66101 

Dear Mr. Brooks: 

MAY 1 g 2011 

AWMD/APDB 

On June 10, 2009, the Missouri Department ofNatural Resources' Air Pollution Control 

Program submitted a request for the EPA to include an amendment to state regulation 10 

CSR 10-6.061, Construction Permit ExemJilions, in the Missouri State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). This ~Ie amendti1~0o' CSR 10~6~061, added an exemption from 

construction permits for the construction oftemporary storage structures that result from 

the occurrence of exceptional events. After discussing this matter with your staff, the Air 

Program is withdrawing the June 10, 2009 request to amend the Missouri SIP because 

inclusion of this rule amendment into the Missouri SIP is not necessary. Sources may still 

obtain temporary permits under section (3) of 10 CSR 10-6.060 Construction Permit rule 

to address these circumstances. 

Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions regarding this SIP 

revision withdrawal, please contact me at the Department's Air Pollution Control , Program, P .0. Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102, or by phone at (573) 751-4817. 

Sincerely, 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM 

JLK:src
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)   In connection with the Annual Report of Flameret, Inc., a Wyoming corporation (the Company), on Form 10-K for the year ending August 31, 2011, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, John Meredith, CFO of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my knowledge:  (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.    /s/ John Meredith John Meredith CFO Dated:  December 28, 2011
No. 9601.

#### The Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company *v.*Whitmore.

(Decided October 23, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Harrison County.

*Messrs. Dunbar & Szveeney*and *Mr. A. 0.*Barnes, for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. D. A. Hollingsworth*and *Mr. W. T. Perry,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 16278]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06475]

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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Kentucky Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a planning meeting of the 
Kentucky Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held 
on April 15, 2014, at the Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, University 
of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40292. The meeting is scheduled to begin 
at 10:00 a.m. and adjourn at approximately 12:00 noon. The purpose of 
the meeting is for the Committee to receive reports from the sub-
committee on ex-felon voting rights and the sub-committee on school 
desegregation, discuss the ex-felon voting rights and school 
desegregation projects, and consider for approval any prepared draft 
reports by the sub-committees.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the Southern Regional Office of the 
Commission by May 15, 2014. The address is: Southern Regional Office, 
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Suite 16T126, 
Atlanta, GA 30303. Persons wishing to email their comments or who 
desire additional information should contact Peter Minarik, Regional 
Director of the Southern Regional Office, at (404) 562-7000 (or for 
hearing impaired TDD 913-551-1414), or by email to pminarik@usccr.gov. 
Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the 
services of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional 
Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the 
meeting.
    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced 
at the Southern Regional Office, as they become available, both before 
and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory 
committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Southern Regional Office at the above 
email or street address.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated on March 20, 2014.
David Mussatt,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2014-06475 Filed 3-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
#### Ex parte STATE of Alabama ex rel. ATTORNEY GENERAL.

77-615.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 21, 1978.

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and FAULKNER, AL-MON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          22,673
<SECURITIES>                                     2,450
<RECEIVABLES>                                  172,523
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,223
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               205,138
<PP&E>                                          32,157
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,059
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 297,948
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,961
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,235
<OTHER-SE>                                     247,470
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   297,948
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               138,141
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   90,720
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                31,133
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 266
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,554
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,035
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,519
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,519
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.30


</TABLE>
#### John LANE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-73.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 10, 1978.

Black & Denaro, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Margarita Esquiroz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

*938Before HENDRY, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See, e. g., *Spinkellink v. State,*313 So.2d 666 (Fla.1975); *Thomas v. State,*296 So.2d 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); *Laytner v. State,*239 So.2d 857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); *Carroll v. State,*186 So.2d 834 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); *Wright v. State,*182 So.2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); and *Savage v. State,*156 So.2d 566 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963).
Southwest Ohio Regional Council of Carpenters Pension Plan 

Checklist Item #25 

If the answer to item 24 is yes, does the application specify the effective date of the proposed partition 

and include a year-by-year projection of the amount of the reduction in benefit payments attributable to 

the partition? See Section 6.02. 

Not Applicable. The answer to Checklist Item No. 24 indicated that no request would be made to the 

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation for a proposed partition. 

Document #25 - 1 - 

SWORCCPP-000167
1

Public Meeting

[DRAFT]

Tuesday, January 24, 2024

1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. ET

Cash Room, Treasury Building

I. Call to Order

II. Roll Call

III. Tribal Opening

IV. Approval of Minutes from the September 7, 2023 Meeting

V. Comments by Members of the Treasury Tribal Advisory Committee (TTAC)

VI. Remarks by Treasurer Chief Marilynn “Lynn” Malerba

VII. Federal Agency Updates

VIII. Treasury and IRS Updates

a. Fatima Abbas, Director, Office of Tribal and Native Affairs, U.S. Department of 

the Treasury

b. Krishna Vallabhaneni, Tax Legislative Counsel, Office of Tax Policy 

c. IRS Updates

IX. Old Business 

X. TTAC Subcommittee Updates

a. General Welfare Exclusion

b. Parity and Reform

c. Tribal Economies

XI. Public Comments

XII. Close of Business 

XIII. Adjourn
No. 00-7168.

#### Anderson *v.*Chrans, Warden.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 21, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-20226 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus WILLIE LEE RANDEL, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:02-CR-156-ALL

-------------------- Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Willie Lee Randel, Jr., in his appeal of the order revoking his term of supervised release has filed a motion and a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Randel has not filed a response to his counsel’s motion. This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby , 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). Article III, § 2 of the Constitution limits federal court jurisdiction to actual cases and controversies. SeeNo. 05-20226 -2- Spencer v. Kemna , 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998). The case-or-controversy requirement demands that “some concrete and continuing injury other than the now-ended incarceration or parole -- some ‘collateral consequence’ of the conviction -- must exist if the suit is to be maintained.” Id. Randel has served the sentence that was imposed upon the revocation of his supervised release. The order revoking Randel’s term of supervised release imposed no further term of supervised release. Accordingly, there is no case or controversy for this court to address, and the appeal is dismissed as moot. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is denied as unnecessary. MOTION DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; APPEAL DISMISSED.
*

ROBERTO GARCIA

VS.
STATE OF TEXAS 

### PD-0879-15

NO. 04-14-00378-CR PD-0879-15 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 8/7/2015 2:38:56 PM

Accepted 8/11/2015 1:58:08 PM ABEL ACOSTA CLERK § IN THE COURT OF § § CRIMINALAPPEALS § § OF TEXAS

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARYREVIEW

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF SAID COURT: Now comes ROBERTO GARCIA, Appellant in the above styled and numbered cause, and moves for an extension oftime of30 days to file a petition 

### for discretionary review, and for good cause shows the following: 1. On June 8, 2015, the Court of Appeals affirmed appellant's conviction. ROBERTO GARCIA v. State, 04-14-00378-CR. This petition is 

### therefore due on July 9, 2015, thirty (30) days from the date that the Court of Appeals affirmedappellant's conviction. 2. Counsel has been unable to complete the petition for the following reasons: Counsel has been unable to complete the petition due to the fact that 

### counsel has been battling illness that has resulted in his hospitalization on two 

### separate occasions. Counsel was hospitalized on July 13, 2015, atChristus Spohn Kleberg in Kingsville, Kleberg County, Texas. Counsel was hospitalized on July 27, 2015, at Christus Spohn Hospital Shoreline in Corpus, Christi, Texas. It was 

### medically necessary for Counsel to undergo a surgery on August 7, 2015, that resulted in the failure to meet the extension deadline to file a petition for 

## discretionaryreview. Counselis currentlyrecovering. FILED IN 3. Defendantis currentlyfree onbond. COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS August 11, 2015
ABELACOSTA, CLERKWHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, appellant respectfully requests an extension of30 days to file apetition for discretionary review.
Respectfully submitted,

DAVID T. GARCIA 721 E. King KINGSVILLE, TX 78363 Tel: (361) 595-4142 Fax: (361) 595-0544

/s/David T. Garcia By:. DAVID T. GARCIA State Bar No. 07631800 davidtgarcia0881 @gmail.com Attorney for ROBERTO GARCIA

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

### This is to certify that on August 7, 2015,a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was served on the District Attorney's Office, Brooks County, 100 East MillerStreet, Falfurrias, Texas78355, by mail.

/s/David T. Garcia

DAVID T. GARCIA
### C O U R T O F 

### A P P E A L S

S E C O N D D I S T R I C T O F T E X A S

CHIEF JUSTICE

TERRIE LIVINGSTON

JUSTICES

LEE ANN DAUPHINOT

ANNE GARDNER

SUE WALKER

BILL MEIER

LEE GABRIEL

BONNIE SUDDERTH TIM CURRY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER

401 W. BELKNAP, SUITE 9000

FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76196-0211

TEL: (817) 884-1900

FAX: (817) 884-1932

www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa CLERK

DEBRA SPISAK

CHIEF STAFF ATTORNEY

LISA M. WEST

GENERAL COUNSEL

CLARISSA HODGES

July 28, 2015

Adam K. Golden

1100 Hwy. 1807

Venus, TX 76084 Debra A. Windsor

Assistant District Attorney

401 W. Belknap St.

Fort Worth, TX 76196-0201

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Court of Appeals Numbers: 02-15-00223-CV, 02-15-00224-CV,

02-15-00225-CV, 02-15-00226-CV,

02-15-00227-CV, 02-15-00228-CV,

02-15-00233-CV, 02-15-00234-CV,

02-15-00235-CV, 02-15-00236-CV

Trial Court Case Numbers: 1293990D, 1296000D, 1293989D, 1296288D,

1286758D, 1276101D, 1323790D, 1323812D,

1323805D, 1323795D

Style: Adam K. Golden

v.

The State of Texas

The clerk’s records have been filed under the date of Tuesday, July 28,

2015 in the above referenced causes.

The appellant’s brief is due Thursday, August 27, 2015

. See Tex. R.

App. P. 38.6. You will be notified when the case is set for submission.

A party desiring oral argument must note that request on the outside cover

of the party’s brief. See Tex. R. App. P. 39.7. If no oral argument is requested

by either party, the case may be submitted on the briefs.

PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS COURT HAS ADOPTED THE

STANDARDS FOR APPELLATE CONDUCT, WHICH WERE ADOPTED AND

PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS AND THE TEXAS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ON FEBRUARY 1, 1999 BY02-15-00223-CV

July 28, 2015

Page 2

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET ORDER NO. 99-9012. Copies of the standards

are available from this office and appear on the court's website at

www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa. Parties appearing before this court are

expected to adhere to these standards and non-compliance will be

addressed by the court accordingly.

Respectfully yours,

DEBRA SPISAK, CLERK

By: Rose M. Stewart, Deputy Clerk
Treasury approves Maine’s plan to invest $110 million of CPF funding in 

broadband infrastructure projects that will provide high-quality internet to 

locations that lack access to adequate service.

Capital Projects Fund Award Fact Sheet

Maine

 

▪ Program Summary: $110 million for Broadband Infrastructure (86% of CPF allocation)

▪ Locations to Be Served: 22,500 (estimated)

▪ Program Description: Maine Infrastructure Ready, 

a competitive broadband infrastructure grant program,

will invest in qualified locations that can be served by

line extensions of existing networks, or new networks. 

This program is focused on serving locations that 

currently lack access to reliable wireline service at speeds 

of 100/20 Mbps, including remote locations in Maine’s most rural counties.

‒ Maine Infrastructure Ready is designed to provide internet service with speeds of 100/100 

Mbps symmetrical to households and businesses upon project completion. 

‒ Internet service providers funded by Maine’s program will participate in the FCC’s 

Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) – a $30 per month subsidy for low-income families.

▪ Key State Contact: Maine Connectivity Authority 

Maine Capital Projects Fund Program Overview

As reported by Maine, estimates 

show that investments made 

using the Capital Projects Fund 

will serve 27% of locations still 

lacking high-speed internet 

access in the state.

For More Information: 

For Media Inquiries: 

For General Inquiries:

Please visit www.treasury.gov/CPF

Please contact the U.S. Treasury Press Office at (202) 622-2960

Please email CapitalProjectsFund@treasury.gov for additional information
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105

Mr. James M. Reilly 

## NOV 17 2011
Arizona Public Service Company 4801 Cholla Lake Road Joseph City, Arizona 86032

Dear Mr. Reilly:

Iam writing to inform you that EPA Region 9 is developing a partial Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the state ofArizona. The purpose ofthe Regional HazeFIP is to improve visibility in national parks and wilderness areas in Arizona and surrounding states as required by Section 169A ofthe Clean AirAct (Act). During the process ofdeveloping the Arizona Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted to EPA on March 2, 2011, the ArizonaDepartment of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) performed a five-factor BestAvailable Retrofit Technology (BART) analysis for the ChollaPowerPlant. We will revisit ADEQ's determination, and possibly conduct a new five-factor BART analysis, to determine whether any additional emissions controls are warranted under section 169A(b)(2)(A) ofthe Act, and EPA's implementing regulations and BARTguidelines at40 CFR Part 51, SubpartP and Appendix Y.

As we begin ourFIP analysis, we have requested that ADEQ provide us with all background materials, includingBART analyses, that were performed bythem orthe affected facilities. We may also request that you provide us with additional information on the ChollaPowerPlant as our analysis proceeds. 

### In the meantime, we welcome the submission ofany additional, relevant information that you would like to provide to our office.

EPA has entered into a consentdecree that requires the Agency to propose approval ofArizona's Regional Haze SIP and/or propose a Regional Haze FIP that meets the requirements ofthe Act and EPA's regional haze regulations byMay 15,2012. The consent decree also requires the Agency to take final action on the ArizonaRegional Haze SIP and/or FIP byNovember 15,2012. EPA Region 9 will hold public hearings in Arizona and solicitpublic comments on a proposed ArizonaRegional Haze FIP in the months preceding the November 15 deadline.

Ifyou would like to submit any additional information or analysis, we request that you send it by February 29,2012. Any modeling ofthe facility should use the regulatory versions ofCALPUFF (version 5.8, level 070623), CALMET (version 5.8, level 070623), and CALPOST (version 6.221). You maywish to prepare a modeling protocol and consult with EPA Region 9 about the preparation of modeling inputs in accord with EPA guidance. Submit any information to:

Thomas Webb US EPA (AIR-2) 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105You can also reach Thomas at webb.thomas@epa.gov orbyphone at 415-947-4139.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Ifyou have any questions, please contactThomas Webb or myself(mckaughan.colleen@epa.gov, 520-498-0118).

# &~gh~~ Associate Director, AirDivision

cc: Henry R. Darwin, ADEQ Eric Massey, ADEQ