alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion issued January 28 , 2020

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 1 9 - 00 679 - CV

——————————— GUS H. (TREY) COMISK EY, III , Appellant

V. H. DAVID RAMM, WATER SIDE CONSTRUCTION LL C, AND WSD

CONSTRUCTION, LLC , Appellee s
On Appeal from the 190 th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 2017 - 00507

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Gus H. (Trey) Comiskey , III , ha s neither paid the required fees nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 5, 20.1; see also T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041; Order, Fees2

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. 1 5

- 91 58 (Tex. Aug. 28 , 201 5)

. After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 5, 42.3 (b), (c). We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution for nonpayment of all required fees. See T EX . R. A PP . 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.
June 2 9 , 2015

Mr. David Topping

The Topping Group

77 Madeira Court

St. Charles, MO 63304

Dear Mr. Topping :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we c an not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your March 9 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 0670 ),

but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does no t

comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any

further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would no t adversely affect safety or how the ex emption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your req uest any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst , Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
##### 



AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO THE
SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.
PARTNER AGENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT
   1.
    
    The following provision shall be added under Section IX. General Provisions:
 K.
    
    Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by both parties, each party agrees that during
this Agreement and for a period of one (1) year after the termination or expiration of this
Agreement, it shall not directly or indirectly recruit, solicit or hire any employee of the
other party, or induce or attempt to induce any employee of the other party to discontinue
his or her employment relationship with the other party.
 2.
    
    The word treaty shall be deleted from Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line 1.
 3.
    
    The following clause shall be deleted in its entirety from Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line
1.:
  4.
    
    Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line 15. shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
following:




---



##### 



5.
    
    The following sentence shall be deleted in its entirety from Exhibit B, Other Defined Terms
used in this Agreement, Paragraph B:
 st st st st
    SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.BY: 
NAME:
    
    /s/ William S. Loder

William S. LoderTITLE:
    
    Senior Vice President, Chief Underwriting OfficerSPECIALTY RISK SOLUTIONS, LLCBY: 
NAME:
    
    /s/ Scott H. Keller

Scott H. KellerTITLE:
    
    Managing Member
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON
PAGES 14 AND 15 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED APRIL 30, 1997,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-20-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-22-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                         542,532<F1>
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,769,153
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,299,641
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,767,041
<PP&E>                                       2,732,489
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,629,335)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,406,435
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,750,926
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        62,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,612,809<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,406,435
<SALES>                                     28,590,285
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            28,590,285
<CGS>                                       24,951,677
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               24,951,677
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,002,621
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             197,411
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                438,576
<INCOME-TAX>                                   109,032
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            635,987
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   329,544
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES RESTRICTED CASH OF $149,350
<F2>RETAINED EARNINGS OF $2,052,601 NET OF NOTE RECEIVABLE FROM PRESIDENT OF
$439,732.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 81**  **[EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0590; FRL-] Determination of Attainment for PM**  **10 for the Las Vegas Valley**  **Nonattainment Area, Nevada AGENCY:**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). **ACTION** : Proposed rule. **SUMMARY** : EPA proposes to determine that the Las Vegas Valley nonattainment area in Nevada attained the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to a nominal ten micrometers (PM 10 ) by the applicable attainment date (December 31, 2006), and that the Las Vegas Valley nonattainment area is currently attaining the standard. **DATES** : Comments must be received on or before **[INSERT DATE 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]**  . **ADDRESSES:** Submit comments, identified by docket number EPAR09-OAR-2010-0590, by one of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov . Follow the on-line instructions. 2. E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov . 3. Mail or deliver: Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105- 3901.2 Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** : Wienke Tax at telephone number: (415) 947-4192, e-mail address: tax.wienke@epa.gov , or the above EPA, Region IX address. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** : For further information, please see the direct final action, of the same title, which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register . EPA is approving the attainment determination as a direct final rule without prior proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the preamble to the direct final rule. If EPA receives no adverse comments, EPA will not take further action on this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of3 the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

______ 7/21/2010

________ sb ____ Dated: Keith Takata Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 192 (Thursday, October 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 61348]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24246]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Electricity Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Cancellation of Open Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: On September 11, 2013, in FR Doc. 2013-22119, on pages 55692-
55693, the Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice of open 
meeting announcing a meeting on October 2-3, 2013 of the Electricity 
Advisory Committee (78 FR 55692). This notice announces the 
cancellation of this meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Rosenbaum,, U.S. Department of 
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585; Phone: 
(202) 586-1060.

    Issued at Washington, DC on September 30, 2013.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-24246 Filed 9-30-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

VILMA M. WALKER and LORREN G. SOARES,

Appellants,

v.

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, Solely as Trustee for 

Harborview Mortgage Loan Trust Mortgage Loan Pass-Through 

Certificates, Series 2007-6,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-2760

[December 5, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; John B. Bowman, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE 17-16368 

(11).

Vilma M. Walker and Lorren G. Soares, Miramar, pro se.

Kimberly S. Mello and Joseph H. Picone of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., 

Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

CONNER, FORST and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Order entered October 30 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 14

- 00693

- CR

RICHARD PIPER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F13

- 58792

- Q



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any

other reason.

 The trial court shall first d etermine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute th e appeal, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial

court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determ ine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing the repo rter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can

be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact,

any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS o f the date

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal

shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7287** 

HARRIS EMANUEL FORD , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. PATSY CHAVIS , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. ( 5:13

- hc

- 02268

- D )

Submitted : November 6, 2014 Decided: November 13, 2014

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Harris Emanuel Ford, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Harris Emanuel Ford seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition as successive . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slac k v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ford has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala bility, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             103
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,837
<ALLOWANCES>                                       197
<INVENTORY>                                     10,170
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,198
<PP&E>                                         115,608
<DEPRECIATION>                                  52,871
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 108,325
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           40,228
<BONDS>                                         74,953
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              375
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,087
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,538)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   108,325
<SALES>                                        126,717
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               126,717
<CGS>                                          108,513
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  108,513
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     1
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,772
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,574)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       132
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,706)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,706)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.65)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.65)
        

</TABLE>
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-91,239-02

EX P ARTE DERRICK

LAMONT SMITH, JR., App licant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 77784-A IN THE 426TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM BELL COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant pleade d g uilty to ag g rava ted assault bodily injury with a deadly wea pon and was sentenc ed to f

ourtee n y ear s’ imprisonment. He did not appea l his conviction. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habea s corpus in the county of conviction, and the district cler k forwa rded it to thi s Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. A p plicant contends, among other things, that plea was involunt a r y b e c a u s e tr ia l c o u

n s e l n e v e r informed him that the jury could place him on probation even if it found him g uilty as char g ed in the indictment. Applicant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief

. Hill v. Lockhart , 474 U.S. 52 (1985); Ex parte Argent , 393 S.W .3d 781 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Acc ording ly , the rec ord should be develope d. The trial court is the appropr iate forum for finding s of fac t. T E X . C O D E C R I M .2

P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s cla im. I n developing the record, the trial court may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). I f t he trial court elec ts to hold a hear ing, it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wants to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to repr esent him at the hear ing. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. I f counsel is appointed or reta ined, the trial court shall immediately

notify this Court of counsel’s name

. The trial court shall make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether trial counsel’s p er formanc e was defic ient and Applicant would have insisted on a trial but for counsel’s allege d defic ient perf

ormanc e. The trial court should make detailed finding s reg arding whether trial counsel told Applicant, prior to acc epting the plea offe r, that a jury could place Applicant on probation even if it found him g uilty as char g ed in the indictment. The trial court may make any other finding s and conclusions that it deems appr opriate in re sponse to Applicant’s c laims. The trial court shall make fi ndings of fac t and conclusions of l aw within ninety day s from the date of this order

. The district cler k shall then immediately forwa rd to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the rec ord develope d on rema nd, including, among other things, aff idavits, motions, objections, proposed finding s and conclus ions, order s, and transcr ipts from hear ings and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 4). Any extensions of time must be reque sted by the trial cour

t and obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: Apr il 14, 2021 Do not publish
TS-CKHI01

Attachment #6

Pt. 2, Sec. A, 3

Environmental Release and Disposal Info rmation on the New Chemical Substance

at Industrial Sites Controlled by the Submitter
Document

Exhibit 4.4

AMENDMENT TO 2017 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, Ranger Energy Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) previously adopted the Ranger Energy Services, Inc. 2017 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “LTIP”), to provide equity compensation awards for the employees, consultants and the directors of the Company and its affiliates who perform services for the Company; and
WHEREAS, the Company desires to increase the total number of authorized shares to 3,850,000 shares of the Company’s Class A common stock, par value $0.01 per share;
NOW THEREFORE, the Company amends the LTIP as follows:
1. Section 4(a) shall be amended and restated as follows:
“Subject to adjustment in a manner consistent with Section 8, 3,850,000 shares of Stock are reserved and available for delivery with respect to Awards, and such total shall be available for the issuance of shares upon the exercise of ISOs.”
2. All other sections of the LTIP shall remain unchanged.
) USDA §

CERTIFIED
TENDER
ACCEPTED12-14-00248-crTWELFTH COURT OF APPEALSTYLER, TEXAS4/13/2015 9:22:18 AMCATHY LUSKCLERK