alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. 24-0012

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL ROSS TROMBLEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including June 10, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 1 2024

05/01/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0012
Opinion issued January 28, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-19-00679-CV

———————————

GUS H. (TREY) COMISKEY, III, Appellant

V.

H. DAVID RAMM, WATERSIDE CONSTRUCTION LLC, AND WSD 

CONSTRUCTION, LLC, Appellees

On Appeal from the 190th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2017-00507

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Gus H. (Trey) Comiskey, III, has neither paid the required fees nor 

established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 20.1; 

see also TEX. GOV’T CODE §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041; Order, Fees 
2

Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before 

the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 (Tex. Aug. 

28, 2015). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant 

did not adequately respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 42.3(b), (c).

We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution for nonpayment of all required 

fees. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as 

moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Goodman, and Countiss.
#### James Raymond HOEHL, Plaintiff-Appellee and Cross-Appellant, v. MOTOR VEHICLE DIVISION OF the DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Colorado, Defendant-Appellant and Cross-Appellee.

No. 80CA0515.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I.

Oct. 30, 1980.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 20, 1980.

Certiorari Denied March 2, 1981.

*908Myers, Woodford & Hoppin, P. C., Charles T. Hoppin, Denver, for plaintiff-ap-pellee and cross-appellant.

J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Richard F. Hennessey, Deputy Atty. Gen., Mary J. Mullarkey, Richard H. Forman, Asst. Attys. Gen., Denver, for defendant-appellant and cross-appellee.

COYTE, Judge.

The Department of Revenue appeals from the district court judgment reversing the decision of the hearing officer and ordering the restoration of plaintiff’s driver’s license. We affirm.

The hearing officer revoked plaintiff’s driver’s license for accumulating eleven convictions for traffic offenses within a five year period, each of which resulted in an assessment of four or more points. *See*§ 42-2-202(3), C.R.S.1973. That order was reversed and remanded by the district court to the Motor Vehicle Department in order to allow plaintiff to challenge the record of two of the traffic convictions as shown by the records of the Motor Vehicle Department.

At his second hearing, plaintiff introduced into evidence these two tickets from the Motor Vehicle Department file. Neither ticket reflects any finding of guilty or payment of a fine. The hearing officer found that plaintiff had presented insufficient evidence to negate his driving record as contained in the records of the Motor Vehicle Department, and again revoked his driver’s license. On a second appeal to the district court, it found that plaintiff had only nine convictions within the five year period and was thus not an habitual traffic offender and ordered restoration of plaintiff’s driver’s license. *See*§ 42-2-202(3), C.R.S.1973.

The Department contends that the ticket underlying a driver’s history record is insufficient to overcome the prima facie evidence of the Department’s records. We disagree.

A driver’s history record is prima facie evidence of its contents. But where evidence is presented which rebuts the accuracy of any item in plaintiff’s driving record, there is a fact question to be resolved by the hearing officer. *Gillespie v. Department of Revenue,*41 Colo.App. 561, 592 P.2d 418 (1978).

Here, plaintiff introduced the two tickets themselves to rebut his driving history record. Neither ticket on its face showed a finding of guilty or payment of a fine. Consequently, the presumption that the records of the Division of Motor Vehicles are correct was overcome. Since the Department introduced no additional evidence, the hearing officer’s findings were not supported by the record, § 24-4-106(7), C.R.S.1973, and plaintiff’s driver’s license should not have been revoked.

*909In view of the result reached, we need not discuss the issue raised in plaintiff’s cross-appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

RULAND and VAN CISE, JJ., concur.
#### The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerry NEMNICH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 80SA17.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

July 27, 1981.

*1122J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Richard F. Hennessey, Deputy Atty. Gen., Mary J. Mullarkey, Sol. Gen., Susan P. Mele-Serno-vitz, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.

J. Gregory Walta, Colorado State Public Defender, Robert Breindel, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellant.

HODGES, Chief Justice.

Defendant appeals the judgment of the trial court denying his Crim.P. 85(a) motion for reduction of sentence. We affirm.

Defendant entered a plea of guilty on January 21, 1978 to the charge of first-degree sexual assault. The presentence report revealed an extensive history of violent sexual assaultive behavior on the part of this 88-year old defendant. In September 1978, he was sentenced to a twenty-five to thirty-five year term.

On January 3, 1979, defendant filed a Crim.P. 85(a) motion for reconsideration of sentence. A hearing was held on that motion, and the trial court denied it on May 17, 1979. Defendant now appeals the judgment of the trial court denying this motion.

I.

Initially, defendant argues that a sentence of twenty-five to thirty-five years imprisonment is unduly harsh.

This argument was advanced by defendant during the Crim.P. 85(a) hearing in the trial court, and was rejected. Because this argument challenges the intrinsic fairness of the sentence imposed and not the sentencing procedure utilized by the trial court, it will not be reconsidered on appeal to this court. People v. Malacara, Colo., 606 P.2d 1300 (1980).

II.

Defendant's second argument questions the constitutionality of section 25 of House Bill 1589, as amended in March 1979, Colo. Sess.Laws 1979, ch. 157, Sec. 25 at 672, and claims entitlement to resentencing under the presumptive sentencing provisions of the 1977 version of House Bill 1589, Colo. Sess.Laws 1977, ch. 216, Sec. 18-1-105 at 867. The argument is without merit. People v. McKenna, Colo., 611 P.2d 574 (1980); see People v. Francis, Colo., 630 P.2d 82 (1981.)

Judgment affirmed.

ERICKSON, J., does not participate.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 71 (Thursday, April 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 21977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8828]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Army Science Board Summer Study Meeting

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 
U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 
1976 (U.S.C. 552b, as amended) and 41 Code of the Federal Regulations 
(CFR 102-3.140 through 160, the Department of the Army announces the 
following committee meeting:
    Name of Committee: Army Science Board (ASB).
    Date(s) of Meeting: May 3, 2012.
    Time(s) of Meeting: 11 a.m. to 12 p.m.
    Location: Capital Conference Center, 3601 Wilson BLVD, Arlington, 
VA 22201.
    Purpose: Hear the preliminary findings of the Strategic Directions 
for Army Science and Technology and vote on adoption.
    Proposed Agenda: Open Session, the ASB will hear preliminary 
findings of the Strategic Directions for Army Science & Technology 
study and vote on adoption.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Non ASB attendee's must contact Mr. 
Oscar Valent at 703-617-0316, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#97d8e4f4f6e5b9d5b9c1f6fbf2f9e3b9f4e3e5d7faf6fefbb9fafefb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="723d011113005c305c24131e171c065c110600321f131b1e5c1f1b1e">[email protected]</span></a> before April 
26, 2012 in order to attend.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None.

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-8828 Filed 4-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
May 25, 2018 

AMENDMENT NO. 2

COMMODITY SPECIFICATION 

FROZEN VEGETABLES – June 2017

The purpose of this technical amendment is to add a new pack size for Commodity L. 

Frozen Mushrooms (12/2.5 pound) and to further clarify quality requirements of 

Commodity P. Frozen Butternut Squash. 

L. Frozen, IQF Mushrooms

P. Frozen, Butternut Squash

1. Product description - The frozen diced butternut squash (Cucurbita moschata) shall be

prepared from squash that is clean, sound, and properly matured. The squash must

then be further prepared by washing, stemming, cutting, and cleaning, including

removing peel, seed, and fiber. The product is then blanched and frozen in accordance

with good commercial practice.

2. Style – Diced (approximately 3/4 x 3/4 inch cube shaped units).

3. The frozen diced butternut squash will be evaluated on the following individual

quality factors and tolerances outlined below:

• Color

• Uniformity of size

• Absence of defects

• Character

• Flavor and Odor

• Appearance 

 Individual sample size – 16 ounces or increments of 16 ounces.

4. Color - possesses a practically uniform, bright color typical of well matured frozen

butternut squash and is free from discoloration due to oxidation, or other causes.

5. Uniformity of size – A maximum of 10% by weight of the units may be smaller than

one - half the volume of the predominant size unit

6. Absence of defects – The diced butternut squash shall contain no grit, sand, or silt that

affects the appearance or eating quality of the frozen squash; 

Frozen Vegetables WBSCM

 Material Primary Container Secondary Container

Frozen Mushrooms 

(12/2.5 lb.) 110920 7 15001 10920 0 1 07 15001 10920 7

Specialty Crops 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.

Program Room 1536-S, STOP 0240

Washington, DC 20250-0240
and that for each 16 ounces of product:

• Not more than one piece of harmless extraneous vegetable material (leaves,

detached stems or portions thereof, or other similar harmless vegetable

material).

• Seeds – Not more than 2

• Tough fibrous strings or strands from the seed cavity –not more than an

aggregate total length of 6 inches (measure/score only pieces over 1⁄2” long)

• Total blemishes – not more than 8 percent by weight of the units of which only

2 percent may be major blemishes.

o Blemishes – peel or other blemishes that detract from the appearance or

eating quality

o Major blemishes – blemishes (excluding peel) greater than 1/4 inch or

blemishes that seriously detract from the appearance or eating quality

8. Character - The character after cooking will be fleshy, tender, and not fibrous with no

more than 5% by weight of the units being of reasonably good character.

9. Flavor and Odor – Must possess good typical flavor and odor with no off flavors or

odors. 

10. Net Weight – 6/5 pound containers per case.

11. Appearance - The expected end item will appear as good as, or better than what is

depicted below.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged. 

Frozen Vegetables WBSCM

Material Primary Container Secondary Container

Butternut Squash, 

Diced (6/5 lb.) 110861 8 15001 10861 6 1 07 15001 10861 3
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

N.D.J.,

Respondent

v.

D.E.J.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 297 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

N.D.J.,

Respondent

v.

D.E.J.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 298 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 7th day of August, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
From: Ernie Shea <eshea@25x25.org>

Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 6:40 PM

To: Grundler, Christopher

Cc: Mccarthy, Gina

Subject: Volkswagen of America's proposed F factor for model year 2016-2025 dual fuel vehicles

Dear Mr. Grundler:

Attached for your consideration is a letter signed by a coalition of over 50 agricultural, conservation, 

clean city, public health and biofuel value chain partners, urging the Environmental Protection Agency to 

adopt Volkswagen of America’s proposal for establishing the E85 weighting factor (“F factor”) for model 

year 2016-2025 dual fuel vehicles. This guidance is critical to incentivize the continued production of flex 

fuel vehicles (FFVs) and to support the further advancement and deployment of biofuels into the 

nation’s liquid transportation fuel pool; fuels which are essential to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions and enhancing air quality. 

We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you on this topic. Please let us know what dates 

might work for this meeting to be held. Thank you in advance for your close and thoughtful 

consideration of this proposal.

Sincerely, 

Ernie Shea

25x'25 Project Coordinator

1430 Front Avenue

Lutherville, MD. 21093

eshea@25x25.org

www.25x25.org

410-252-7079 (p)

410-952-0123 (c)

410-616-9264 (f)

25x'25 America's Energy Future

Join us on Facebook!

Follow us on Twitter!
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 28, 2011

h1025 

# Order

October 28, 2011

143881 & (29)(30)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143881 COA: 305481 DAVONTAE SANFORD, Wayne CC: 07-015018-FC Defendant-Appellant.

___________________ _________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to ap peal the October 7, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we ar e not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to stay is DENIED.
Order entered December 20 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 19 - 01473 - CV IN THE ESTATE OF FRANCES ANDERTON BUCHANAN, DECEASED

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Hunt County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 17188 

### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s motion to transfer to this cause the filing fee he paid in appellate cause number 05

- 19

- 1311

- CV, which he has moved to dismiss
. We DENY the motion.
/s/ ROBE RT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE
Agricultural Marketing Service, Commodity Procurement Staff

1400 Independence Ave., SW, Room 3522-S, STOP 0239

Washington, DC 20250-0239

Voice 202.720.4517 Fax 202.720.5871

An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer

 

 May 16, 2016

AMENDMENT NO. 2

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE

MASTER SOLICITATION

FOR COMMODITY PROCUREMENTS

APRIL 2015

This amendment is issued to revise the small business size standards for the acquisition of the 

commodities or products on page 15, FAR Provision 52.204-8, of the Master Solicitation dated 

April 2015, as follows:

52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (APR 2016)

 (1) The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes and small 

business size standards for the acquisition of the commodities or products are as follows:

Size Standards 

NAICS Commodity Description

Millions of Dollars($) 

or No. of employees

311421 Canned Dried Beans/ Canned Fruit/ Canned Juice/Canned Vegetables 1,000

311423 Dried Fruit/Dehydrated Products 750

311411 Frozen Fruit/ Frozen Juice/ Frozen Vegetables 1,000

311991

Perishable Prepared Food Manufacturing 

(Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (including bulk), Fresh Sliced Apples, 

Baby Carrots, etc.) 500

311911 Roasted Nuts and Peanut Butter Manufacturing 750

311999

Corn Syrup/Dry Beans and Legumes/ Whole Eggs/

All Purpose Egg Mix/ Liquid Whole Eggs 500

112310 Shelled Eggs $15.0

311615 Chicken Products/ Chicken Bulk/ Turkey Products 1,250

311611

Animal (except Poultry) Slaughtering 

(Fine Ground/Coarse Ground Beef/Beef Patties/Pork Products) 1,000

311710 Seafood Products Preparation and Packaging (Fresh and Frozen Seafood) 750

311422 Specialty Canning (Canned Beef Chili without the beans/Beef Stew) 1,250
Amendment No. 2

Page 2

(2) The small business size standard for a concern which submits an offer in its 

own name, other than on a construction or service contract, but which proposes to furnish a 

product which it did not itself manufacture, must be a small business concern with size standard 

shown on the above chart.

 (End of provision)

Sincerely,

Felicitas C. Lofton

Contracting Officer

Together We’re Making a Difference: American Agriculture for the American People.
Fruit & Specialty Crops 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.

Vegetable Inspection Room 1536-S, STOP 0240

Program Division Washington, DC 20250-0240

 March 3, 2016 

 

AMENDMENT NO. 1

COMMODITY SPECIFICATION

FROZEN POTATO PRODUCTS – April 2015

The purpose of this amendment is to revise Section II., Individual Commodity Specifications.

This amendment will streamline and clarify the determination and responsibilities of the sodium 

content levels. Other revisions are to D., Frozen French-Cut Sweet Potatoes, is to remove the 

term French-Cut, to clarify the Styles, Number 3, and added pack sizes 13. Also, there is an 

addition of a material code to V., Exhibit 4 for Crinkle Cut Style. 

The deletions are strikethroughs and additions are shown in blue below:

II. Individual Commodity Specifications

Additional language: The vendor is responsible for the product meeting the sodium content 

requirements for each individual commodity. Vendors must make available (when 

requested), a laboratory analsyis report to document and verify information provided in a 

Nutritional Facts Panel.

D. Frozen French Cut Sweet Potatoes

3. Style – French-Cut which may may have flat or corrugated surfaces. Strips

a. French or Straight cut, (Material 101013) 

b. Crinkle cut (or corrugated) surfaces, (Material 110721)

For clarification, WBSM information is shown below:

101013 SWEET POTATOES FRENCH CUT FRZ PKG-6/5 LB

110721 SWEET POTATOES CRINKLE FRZ PKG-6/5 LB

13. Pack Size – 30 pound cases (6/5 pound bags, 12/2.5 pound bags, 10/3 pound bags).

V. Exhibits Exhibit 4

Universal Product Codes

Frozen Potatoes WBSCM Material Primary container Secondary Container 

Sweet Potatoes

Crinkle cut, Frz Pkg - 6/5 LB 110721 7 15001 10721 3 1 07 15001 10721 0

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
EXHIBIT 35.1








ANNUAL SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB





CARMAX BUSINESS SERVICES, LLC








The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of CarMax Business Services, LLC, as Servicer pursuant to Section 3.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of September 1, 2021 (the "Sale and Servicing Agreement") among CarMax Auto Owner Trust 2021-4, as Issuer (the "Issuer"), CarMax Auto Funding LLC, as Depositor, and CarMax Business Services, LLC, as Servicer (the "Servicer"), does hereby certify that:





1. CarMax Business Services, LLC is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.





2. The undersigned is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer's Certificate.





3. A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period beginning on March 1, 2022 and ending on February 28, 2023 and of the Servicer's performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement was made under my supervision.  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such period.








Capitalized terms used in this certificate and not otherwise defined herein have the meanings assigned to them in the Sale and Servicing Agreement.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of the Servicer, has duly executed this Officer's Certificate this 26th day of May, 2023.





CARMAX BUSINESS SERVICES, LLC





/s/ Andrew J. McMonigle


Andrew J. McMonigle


Vice President and Treasurer
BHA Road Map to 

End-to-End Supply 

Chain Visibility 
BHA Supply Chain

2

More than 9.5 million metric tons of commodities flowed through

the BHA supply chain in the last 10 years
Stakeholder Involvement

Award Procurement Transport & Storage Distribution

Food movement from US farms to global communities requires significant stakeholder collaboration 3
Current Stakeholder Supply Chain Visibility

4

BHA USDA Supplier FF Carrier IPs Beneficiary

Start End

Award PO Bagging Transport Load Port Shipping Dis. Port Warehouse Beneficiary

•Siloed stakeholder visibility

•Many data streams

No downstream 

visibility

No upstream 

visibility
BHA Downstream Data Collection

•No end to end visibility

•No centralized data

•No real time data

•Numerous data formats

•Manual data manipulation

•No single truth data source

•Undependable data streams

5

BHA USDA Supplier FF Carrier IPs Beneficiary

BHA

internal data

Start End

Award PO Bagging Transport Load Port Shipping Dis. Port Warehouse Beneficiary

• Spreadsheets

• Manual data manipulation

• Numerous formats

• No obligation to send

• 6 month reports

• Sparse, top level data
6
BHA Supply Chain Decision Support Gaps

7

Insight to root causes of 

delivery problems

Disaster response 

Planning tools

Alternative data views 

for optimizing solutions 

Verification of critical 

delivery stages

Enhanced coordination for 

comprehensive solutions

Complete access to 

critical data

Food delivery 

and safety alerts

Visualization of 

complex data