alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 8, 

2017.

In The 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

NO. 14-17-00269-CV

ANTHONY SHAWN MATSON, Appellant 

V.

CYNTHIA MATTHEWS, SILVER EAGLE TOWING D/B/A SILVER 

EAGLE TOWLING AND HOUSTON AUTO STORAGE, Appellees 

On Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No. 2 

Harris County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 1084876 

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

This is an appeal from a judgment signed January 10, 2017. On August 1, 

2017, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The 

motion is granted. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 

PER CURIAM 

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Brown, and Wise.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1965 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 515
113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1965

                          [Report No. 113-228]

 To amend the East Bench Irrigation District Water Contract Extension 
Act to permit the Secretary of the Interior to extend the contract for 
                        certain water services.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 28, 2014

  Mr. Baucus (for himself, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Walsh) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Energy and Natural Resources

                             July 31, 2014

              Reported by Ms. Landrieu, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the East Bench Irrigation District Water Contract Extension 
Act to permit the Secretary of the Interior to extend the contract for 
                        certain water services.

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

SECTION 1. EAST BENCH IRRIGATION DISTRICT CONTRACT EXTENSION.

    Section 2(1) of the East Bench Irrigation District Water Contract 
Extension Act (Public Law 112-139; 126 Stat. 390) is amended by 
striking ``4 years'' and inserting ``10 years''.
                                                       Calendar No. 515

113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 1965

                          [Report No. 113-228]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To amend the East Bench Irrigation District Water Contract Extension 
Act to permit the Secretary of the Interior to extend the contract for 
                        certain water services.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 31, 2014

                       Reported without amendment
```
Exhibit 12

                         Continental Global Group, Inc.
                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

                        (In thousands, except for ratios)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                       Years ended December 31
                                               2003             2002            2001            2000            1999
                                           ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                         <C>              <C>              <C>            <C>             <C>

Computation of Earnings:
Loss before income taxes and accounting
   changes                                   $ (12,629)       $ (8,689)        $ (8,413)      $ (11,200)      $  (8,728)
Add:
   Interest expense (1)                         15,280          15,408           15,787          15,826          15,225
   Portion of rent expense
     representative of an interest
     factor                                        845             677              703             691             815
                                           ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Earnings                                     $   3,496        $  7,396         $  8,077       $   5,317       $   7,312
                                           ==============================================================================

Computation of Fixed Charges:
   Interest expense                           $ 15,280        $ 15,408         $ 15,787       $  15,826        $ 15,225
   Portion of rent expense
     representative of an interest
     factor                                        845             677              703             691             815
                                           ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fixed Charges                                 $ 16,125        $ 16,085         $ 16,490       $  16,517        $ 16,040
                                           ==============================================================================

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                    - (2)           -  (3)           - (4)         -   (5)         -  (6)
                                           ==============================================================================
</TABLE>

(1)      Amortization of deferred financing costs of $520 is included in
         interest expense.

(2)      Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended
         December 31, 2003 by $12,629.

(3)      Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended
         December 31, 2002 by $8,689.

(4)      Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended
         December 31, 2001 by $8,413.

(5)      Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended
         December 31, 2000 by $11,200.

(6)      Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended
         December 31, 1999 by $8,728.
SCPR-20-0000733

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

IN RE GERONIMO VALDRIZ, JR., Petitioner.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER GRANTING PETITION TO RESIGN AND SURRENDER LICENSE

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Wilson JJ., 

and Intermediate Court of Appeals Associate Judge Leonard,

assigned by reason of vacancy)

Upon consideration of the petition to resign and

surrender license to practice law in the State of Hawai#i, filed

by attorney Geronimo Valdriz, Jr., pursuant to Rule 1.10 of the

Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH), and

the affidavits submitted in support thereof, we conclude that

Petitioner Valdriz has fully complied with the requirements of

RSCH Rule 1.10. Therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is granted. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to RSCH Rule 1.10(g),

that the Petitioner shall comply with the notice, affidavit, and

record requirements of RSCH Rules 2.16(a), (b), (d), and (g).

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCPR-20-0000733

10-DEC-2020

12:10 PM

Dkt. 6 OGP
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall remove the

name of Petitioner Valdriz, attorney number 3342, from the roll

of attorneys of the State of Hawai#i, effective with the filing

of this order.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, December 10, 2020.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard

2
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1964 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to exempt certain flights from 

increased aviation security service fees. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 27, 2014 

Ms. HIRONO (for herself, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. BEGICH, and Mr. SCHATZ) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to exempt certain 

flights from increased aviation security service fees. 

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 ‘‘Passenger Fee Re5 structuring Exemptions Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXCEPTIONS TO RESTRUCTURING OF PASSENGER 

7 FEE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 44940(c) of title 49, 

9 United States Code, is amended— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•S 1964 IS

1 (1) by striking ‘‘Fees imposed’’ and inserting 

2 the following: 

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided by 

4 paragraph (2), fees imposed’’; and 

5 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(2) EXCEPTIONS.—Fees imposed under sub7 section (a)(1) may not exceed $2.50 per 

8 enplanement, and the total amount of such fees may 

9 not exceed $5.00 per one-way trip, for passengers— 

10 ‘‘(A) boarding to an eligible place under 

11 subchapter II of chapter 417 for which essential 

12 air service compensation is paid under that sub13 chapter; or 

14 ‘‘(B) on flights, including flight segments, 

15 between 2 or more points in Hawaii or 2 or 

16 more points in Alaska.’’. 

17 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 601(d) of 

18 the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 is amended in the mat19 ter preceding paragraph (1) by inserting ‘‘, as modified 

20 by the amendments made by section 2 of the Passenger 

21 Fee Restructuring Exemptions Act of 2014’’ after ‘‘sub22 section (b)’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2012214EN.01000101.xml

| 20.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 214/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 214/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6591 — Tennet Offshore GmbH/Mitsubishi Corporation/Tennet Offshore 2)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 214/01

On 11 July 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6591. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6591. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
# Table 1

# Sheet3

# Sheet4

# Sheet5

# Sheet6

# Sheet7

# Sheet8

# Sheet9

# Sheet10

# Sheet11

# Sheet12

# Sheet13

# Sheet14

# Sheet15

# Sheet16
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1462

JUPITER DENNELL WILSON, SR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CITY OF CHESAPEAKE, in its Official Capacity,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

CITY OF CHESAPEAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT; BATTALION CHIEF CARL 

ACKISS, in his official capacity; FIRE FIGHTER WILLIAM COPELAND, in his 

official capacity,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Douglas E. Miller, Magistrate Judge. (2:16-cv-00301-DEM)

Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 17, 2018

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Jupiter Dennell Wilson, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Melissa A. Hamann, OFFICE OF THE 

CITY ATTORNEY, Chesapeake, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Jupiter Dennell Wilson, Sr., appeals the magistrate judge’s* orders granting the 

City of Chesapeake summary judgment on his discrimination and retaliation claims, 

brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 

2000e-17 (West 2012 & Supp. 2018), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 

1967, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 621 to 634 (West 2018), and denying Wilson’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 

59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm the district court’s orders. See Wilson v. City of Chesapeake, No. 2:16-cv00301-DEM (E.D. Va. Feb. 12, 2018 & April 17, 2018). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 * The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(c)(2) (2012).
Table 11.  Percent Distribution by Type of Unit, for the United States and Regions:
                  First Quarter 2003 and 2002

(Percent distribution may not add to total, due to rounding)


                                                   First quarter 2003


                                           United    North-     Mid-      South      West
                                           States     east      West

All housing units........................      100       100       100       100       100

    Year-round vacant....................      9.4       7.5       8.4      12.0       7.6
      For rent...........................      3.0       2.1       2.7       3.7       2.7
      For sale only......................      1.0       0.6       1.1       1.2       0.9
      Rented or sold, awaiting occupancy.      0.7       0.7       0.8       0.7       0.6
      Held off market....................      4.7       4.2       3.7       6.4       3.4
        For occasional use...............      1.7       1.5       0.7       2.4       1.5
        Temporarily occupied by persons
        with usual residence elsewhere...      1.0       0.9       0.9       1.2       0.6
        For other reasons................      2.1       1.8       2.1       2.8       1.3

    Seasonal vacant......................      2.9       3.5       3.4       2.6       2.4

    Occupied.............................     87.7      89.0      88.2      85.3      90.0




                                                   First quarter 2002r

Type of housing unit
                                           United    North-     Mid-      South      West
                                           States     east      West

All housing units........................      100       100       100       100       100

    Year-round vacant....................      9.1       7.3       8.3      11.3       7.7
      For rent...........................      2.9       2.0       2.8       3.5       2.6
      For sale only......................      1.0       0.7       1.2       1.2       0.8
      Rented or sold, awaiting occupancy.      0.6       0.6       0.7       0.6       0.6
      Held off market....................      4.6       3.9       3.6       6.0       3.7
        For occasional use...............      1.5       1.1       0.7       2.2       1.5
        Temporarily occupied by persons
        with usual residence elsewhere...      0.9       0.9       0.7       1.1       0.8
        For other reasons................      2.2       1.9       2.2       2.7       1.5

    Seasonal vacant......................      3.0       4.0       3.3       2.7       2.3

    Occupied.............................     88.0      88.8      88.5      86.0      90.0
       rRevised
Table 7.  Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder:  Fourth Quarter 2001 and 2000


                             Fourth     Fourth    Standard   Standard
Age of householder           Quarter    Quarter   error on   error on
                                 2001       2000  2001 rate difference

United States..............      68.0       67.5        0.2        0.2

    Under 25 years.........      24.1       22.4        0.6        0.9
    25 to 29 years.........      40.8       39.3        0.7        0.9
    30 to 34 years.........      55.0       54.8        0.6        0.8
    35 to 39 years.........      64.9       65.8        0.5        0.8
    40 to 44 years.........      71.2       70.6        0.5        0.7
    45 to 49 years.........      74.5       74.7        0.5        0.7
    50 to 54 years.........      78.1       78.4        0.5        0.7
    55 to 59 years.........      81.9       80.8        0.5        0.8
    60 to 64 years.........      80.8       79.4        0.6        0.9
    65 to 69 years.........      82.4       82.0        0.6        0.9
    70 to 74 years.........      83.3       83.8        0.6        0.9
    75 years and over......      78.4       77.7        0.5        0.7

      Under 35 years.......      42.2       41.2        0.4        0.5
      35 to 44 years.......      68.2       68.3        0.4        0.5
      45 to 54 years.......      76.2       76.4        0.4        0.5
      55 to 64 years.......      81.4       80.2        0.4        0.6
      65 years and over....      80.7       80.4        0.3        0.5
Exhibit 31.4



CERTIFICATION



I, Paul Ainsworth, certify that:



| | 1. |  | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Continental Materials Corporation; and
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. |  | Based on my knowledge, this Amendment No. 1 does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
| | -- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: April 27, 2020



| |     |                                           
| | --- | ------------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ Paul Ainsworth                        
| |     | Paul Ainsworth                            
| |     | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1748 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1748

 To authorize appropriations to the Secretary of Commerce to establish 
  public-private partnerships under the Market Development Cooperator 
   Program of the International Trade Administration, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 20, 2013

  Mr. Schatz introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize appropriations to the Secretary of Commerce to establish 
  public-private partnerships under the Market Development Cooperator 
   Program of the International Trade Administration, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``American Export Promotion Act of 
2013''.

SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE MARKET DEVELOPMENT COOPERATOR 
              PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.

    (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the 
Secretary of Commerce, for the 18-month period beginning on the date of 
the enactment of this Act, $8,000,000 for the Industry and Analysis 
unit of the International Trade Administration--
            (1) to establish public-private partnerships under the 
        Market Development Cooperator Program of the International 
        Trade Administration; and
            (2) to underwrite a portion of the start-up costs for new 
        projects carried out under that Program to strengthen the 
        competitiveness and market share of United States industry, not 
        to exceed, for each such project, the lesser of--
                    (A) \1/2\ of the total start-up costs for the 
                project; or
                    (B) $500,000.
    (b) Requirements.--In obligating and expending the funds 
appropriated pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary of Commerce 
shall give preference to activities that the Secretary determines 
will--
            (1) assist small- and medium-sized businesses in the United 
        States; and
            (2)(A) create or sustain the greatest number of jobs in the 
        United States;
            (B) obtain the maximum return on investment;
            (C) increase United States exports to the Asia and Pacific 
        region;
            (D) increase United States exports in services; or
            (E) address export priorities set by the Department of 
        Commerce.
                                 <all>
```
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-40815 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. MIGUEL GALVAN-FAJARDO, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:10-CR-1317-1
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appo i n t ed to represent Miguel GalvanFajardo (Galvan) has m o v e d for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Galvan has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D April 17 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t hasd ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-40815 Document: 00511824414 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/17/2012No. 11-40815

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 11-40815 Document: 00511824414 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/17/2012
#### Norman A. ROSSMAN and Marilyn G. Rossman, his wife, et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF ORLANDO, Appellee.

No. 70-1014.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 22, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.