alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. XAVIER C ANO, a .k.a . Xavie r Edga rdo C an o, a . k.a . Ja

vie r, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 12-50151

D.C . No. 2:10-c r-00456-C AS M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia C hristina A. Sny de r, Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d

June 10, 2013 ** B e fore : HAW K INS, M c KEOW N, a nd B ER ZON, C irc uit Judge s . Xavie r C ano a

ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c h a lle nge s the 70-m onth se nte nc e im

pose d following his guilty -ple a c onvic tion for posse ssion with inte nt to distribute

and distribution of m

e tha m phe tam i ne , in viola

t ion of 21 

# FIL ED JUN 17 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).U.S.C . § 841(a )(1). Pursua n t to Ande rs v . C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), C ano’ s c ounse l ha s file d a

brie f stating tha

t the re are no grounds for re lie f, a long with a m otion to withdra

w a s c ounse l of re c ord. W e hav e provide d C ano the opportunity to file a pro se supple m e n ta l brie f. No pro se supple m e nta l brie f or answe ring brie f ha s be e n file d . C ano wa ive d his right to a ppe a l five spe c ifie d issue s re lat e d to his sen te nc e . Our inde pe nde nt re v i e w of the re c ord pursua n t to Pe nson v . Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), disc lose s no a

rgua ble issue a s to the va lidity of the a ppe a l wa ive r or a s to any se n te nc ing issuetha

t would be outsidethe sc o pe of the a ppe a l wa ive r. C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. AFFIRM E D.

1 2 - 5 0 1 5 1 2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Air Force

# AGENCY:

 The United States Air Force.

# ACTION:

 Meeting Notice.

# SUMMARY:

 This meeting notice is to inform the public that the Global Positioning Systems (GPS) Directorate will be hosting an open GPS Satellite Simulator Working Group (SSWG) meeting for manufacturers of GPS constellation simulators utilized by the federal government on 17 May 2012 from 0730-1600 (Pacific Standard Time). The purpose of this meeting is to disseminate information about GPS simulators, discuss current and on-going efforts related to simulators and form a functioning GPS Satellite Simulator Working Group with industry and government participation.

The GPS Satellite Simulator Working Group is open to any current manufacturer of GPS constellation satellite simulators who supply products to the Department of Defense. Please note that participants must possess a SECRET clearance to attend.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                         We request that you register for this event no later than 8 May 2012. Please send the registration to                         *justin.deifel@losangeles.af.mil*                         and                         *wayne.urubio@losangeles.af.mil*                         and provide your name, organization, telephone number, address and security clearance information.                    

Wayne T. Urubio, 

2nd Lieutenant, USAF, SMC/GPE, MUE Test Manager.

Henry Williams, Jr., 

DAF, Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2012-9556 Filed 4-19-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-10-P
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, R. Clay Hulette, certify
that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q of Kentucky First Federal Bancorp

2. Based on my knowledge, this report
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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;

4 The registrants other certifying
officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls
and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change
in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected,
or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying
officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material,
that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting.

|Date: November 14, 2007 | /s/R. Clay Hulette   ****                        | 
|----------------------- | ------------------------------------------------ | 
|                        | R. Clay Hulette                                 
|                        | Vice President and Chief
      Financial Officer

---
Order entered April 10, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-01228-CR

BRANDY MECHELLE HARRIS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F13-00510-X

ORDER

Appellant’s April 8, 2015 second motion for extension of the time to file appellant’s brief 

is DENIED. 

We ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has 

not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). 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.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

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

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

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
Inspection and Weighing Program Obligations by Office – FY 23

Obligation Categories

Salary and 

Benefits Travel

Shipping and 

Moving 

Expenses

Rent and 

Utilities Printing

Other 

Services

Supplies and 

Materials Equipment

Insurance 

Claims Interest Paid Office Total

FGIS Deputy Admin. $ 1,063,790 $ 12,647 $ 0 -$ 2,798 $ 1,124 -$ 950,689 -$ 1,037 -$ 228 $ 0 $ 0 $ 122,810

Field Management Div. $ 695,802 $ 37,289 -$ 2,903 $ 590 $ 0 $ 111,014 $ 784 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 842,576

International Affairs Div. $ 0 $ 15,403 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 15,403

Quality Assurance Div. $ 6,075 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 6,075

Master Scale Depot $ 300,415 $ 18,248 $ 0 $ 17,506 $ 0 $ 24,127 $ 8,053 $ 112 $ 0 $ 0 $ 368,461

New Orleans $ 16,349,545 $ 76,944 -$ 24,465 $ 415,628 -$ 1 -$ 78,424 $ 76,394 $ 1,130 $ 5,453 $ 20 $ 16,822,225

Domestic $ 332,866 $ 25,138 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 973 $ 1,500 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 360,476

Tech & Science Div. $ 346,100 -$ 538 $ 804 $ 2,296 $ 0 $ 41,339 $ 31,762 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 421,763

Toledo $ 1,882,522 $ 125,568 -$ 42,235 $ 107,729 $ 0 -$ 24,271 $ 30,902 $ 40,074 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,120,288

Portland $ 2,050,047 $ 142,517 -$ 31,425 $ 129,410 $ 0 -$ 301 $ 58,704 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,348,952

League City $ 7,039,780 $ 317,721 -$ 15,085 $ 267,153 $ 0 -$ 20,075 $ 55,735 $ 41,245 $ 0 $ 0 $ 7,686,473

Overhead 1 $ 6,316 $ 0 $ 2,390 $ 60,329 $ 16,166 $ 545,485 $ 3,965 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 634,650

TOTAL $ 30,073,259 $ 770,936 -$ 112,920 $ 997,842 $ 17,289 -$ 350,823 $ 266,763 $ 82,334 $ 5,453 $ 20 $ 31,750,153

1 Overhead includes AMS Overhead obligations, Departmental Charges (Central Charges & Greenbook), and prior year overhead adjustments.

Note: FY23 overhead obligations were rebalanced with $4.6M appropriated.

Dated: 11/06/2023
EXHIBIT 10.23

                                   AMENDMENT


       Metalclad Corporation ( Company ) and Anthony C. Dabbene ( Employee )
  amend their Employment Agreement, dated July 10, 1996, as follows:

       1.  TERM:  The term is extended to July 22, 1998.

       2.  COMPENSATION:  Base salary is increased to $180,000 per year
  effective May 1, 1997.  Annual Christmas Bonus is increased to 20%.

       3.  OTHER TERMS:  All other terms and conditions not amended herein
  shall remain in full force and effect for the life of the contract.

  Dated this 22nd day of July, 1997.


  METALCLAD CORPORATION



  By:
     ------------------------------------
     Grant S. Kesler, President


  EMPLOYEE


  ---------------------------------------
  Anthony C. Dabbene
#### Armour BAILEY, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 7466.

United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.

Nov. 19, 1963.

Erwin A. Cook, Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellant.

Robert M. Green, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Newell A. George, U. S. Atty., District of Kansas, was with him on the brief), for appellee.

Before PICKETT, LEWIS, and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

For the second time appellant is here seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 from a sentence imposed under 18 U.S.C. § 2113. The trial court, without a hearing, denied relief. On his prior application appellant contended that his guilty plea was not made voluntarily and understanding^. The trial court held to the contrary and we affirmed. Bailey v. United States, 10 Cir., 312 F.2d 679.

Appellant now contends that the sentence should be vacated because the prosecution followed an illegal arrest and search. We have held to the contrary in a case brought by a codefendant. See Sullivan v. United States, 10 Cir., 315 F.2d 304.

Appellant says that the present application should not have been denied without a hearing. The contention is without merit. As we pointed out in Sullivan, if the guilty plea was voluntary, the allegedly illegal conduct is no ground for relief under § 2255. In the prior § 2255 application we held that the guilty plea was made knowingly and voluntarily.

Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Consumer Product Safety Commission

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

Dated: April 18, 2012.

Todd A Stevenson,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-9688 Filed 4-18-12; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID** 

### 07610 **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  

### x 07610\07610_Checklist.XLS EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 07610\07610_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 07610\07610_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted 

### x 07610\07610_PartA.XLS Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07610\07610_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07610\07610_PartH.XLS Plant submitted survey file



### 07610\Certification Statement Plant ID_07610.pdf Plant certification statement 

### 07610\Supporting Documentation\07610_Flow diagram Lakewood Combined Cycle.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 07610\Supporting Documentation\07610_Lakewood plant layout.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 07610\Supporting Documentation\07610_Water balance at 59 deg.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database
. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819

DCN: SE03562

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION (CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED APRIL 14, 2015

NO. 03-15-00180-CV

Rebecca Mae Blount, Appellant

v.

Yellow Orchid, LLC, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on March 11, 2015. Appellant has

filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion, the Court 

agrees that the motion should be granted. Therefore, the Court grants the motion and dismisses 

the appeal. Appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court 

below.
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                    Form 8-K

                  CURRENT REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
                      THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                       Date of Report: December 15, 1995

                        BOONTON ELECTRONICS CORPORATION

                            A New Jersey corporation
                         Commission File Number 0-2364
                 I.R.S. Employer Identification No. 22-1543137

           25 Eastmans Road, PO Box 465, Parsippany, N.J. 07054-0465
                                 (201) 386-9696

    ITEM 5.  OTHER EVENTS
             ------------

    On December 5, 1995, the Board of Directors of Boonton Electronics
Corporation (BEC) agreed to terminate the letter of intent previously executed
with General de Mesure et de Maintenance Electronique S.A. (GMME) which letter
of intent anticipated a GMME tender offer to purchase of a controlling interest
in BEC for three dollars and fifty cents ($3.50) per common share.

    Upon completion of GMME's due diligence review, a contingency of the letter
of intent, GMME decided not to proceed with their proposed tender offer. GMME
has now agreed to invest $2,200,000 into BEC through the purchase of 180,300
treasury shares together with 523,700 authorized but unissued common shares for
three dollars and twelve and one-half cents ($3.125) per common share.

    The sale of the BEC common shares is conditioned upon, among other things,
SEC approval and the execution of a definitive Stock Purchase Agreement by and
between BEC and GMME on or before March 29, 1996.



    EXHIBITS: None 
    --------

                                       36
<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURE

    Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
hereunto duly authorized.

                           BOONTON ELECTRONICS CORPORATION

                        By: /s/ John E. Titterton
                           -------------------------------
                                  John E. Titterton
                             Secretary/Treasurer and Vice
                                  President Finance

Dated: December 15, 1995

                                       37
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-82,941-01

EX PARTE DONALD CHASSTION, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1220013-A IN THE 228 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of a

cocaine and sentenced to 30 days’ incarceration in the County Jail. TEX. PENAL CODE § 12.44(a). 

On February 20, 2015, the trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law that were

based on laboratory results purportedly showing that Applicant possessed no controlled substances. 

The trial court recommended that relief be granted. However, the habeas record contains only an

unsigned letter describing the results of the laboratory testing. 

The trial court shall supplement the record with the laboratory report showing the analysis
2

of the evidence from Applicant’s case. If no such report is available, the trial court shall make

findings of fact addressing the absence of this evidence and assessing the credibility of the letter

included in the habeas record as Exhibit 4. The trial court shall also make any other supplemental

findings of fact and conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of

Applicant’s claim for habeas corpus relief.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has supplemented the record and

resolved the fact issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental

transcript containing all affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes

from any hearing or deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and

conclusions of law, shall be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any

extensions of time shall be obtained from this Court.

Filed: April 15, 2015

Do not publish
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION2



## FEB 2 8 2011 Honorable Luis Fortufio Burset Governor ofPuerto Rico BMB 110202 Calle San Gustos San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901-1711 Dear Governor Fortuiio Burset: 290 BROADWAY NEW YORK, NY 10007-1866

On June 3, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revised the healthbased National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (S02) by establishing 

### anew 1-hour standard at a level of75 parts per billion (ppb). This new 1-hour standard will protect public health by reducing people's exposureto high short-term (5-minutes to 24-hours) concentrations ofS02. An area meets the new standard when the 3-year average ofthe 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations does not exceed 75 ppb. Section 107(d)(l) ofthe Clean 

### Air Act (CAA) describes theprocess EPA follows for designating areas as meeting ornot meeting a new or revised NAAQS. Within one year of establishing a new or revised standard, each governormust recommend a designation of attainment, nonattainment or unclassifiable, with appropriate boundaries, for areas 

### within their jurisdiction. Therefore, we ask that your state provide designationrecommendations, including appropriate area boundaries, for all areas by June 3, 2011, 

### withrespectto the 1-hour S02 NAAQS. The enclosed memorandumprovides guidance to state and local 

### air pollution control agencies and tribes onthe timeline and process for designating areas under the revised S02 standard. We plan to announce ourintended designations no laterthan 120 days priorto promulgating final designations. Follov.ring the annmmcement ofintended designations, states and tribes will have the opportunity to commenton any modifications EPA proposes to their recommendations. EPA intendsto complete designations by no later

### thanJune 3, 2012. Establishing area designations is a key step in the process ofproviding the health protection intended by the CAA. Should you have questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me orhave your staffcontact Raymond Werner, ChiefAir Programs Branch, at 212-637-3706. Sincerely,

Judith A. Enck Regional Administrator

lntemet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable • PTtntedwlh Vegetable 01 Based Inks on R&eycled Pape!" (M.,O!um 30% Postconsumer)

### Enclosure Cc: Mr. Pedro Nieves Miranda. President Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board