alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NUMBER 13-10-00544-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JEFFREY ALAN KOLAR A/K/A JEFFERY ALAN KOLAR, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

of Jefferson County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Garza, Vela, and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Jeffrey Alan Kolar a/k/a Jeffery Alan Kolar, by and through his attorney, 

has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal because he no longer desires to prosecute it. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the 

motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the 

appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will 
2

be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 

Delivered and filed the

19th day of May, 2011.
#### Kathleen A. Sullivan, Respondent, v Philip A. Sullivan, Appellant.

—Harvey, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Fischer, J.) declaring plaintiff’s entitlement to a divorce, entered August 28, 1990 in Broome County, upon a decision of the court.

Following a jury trial in this divorce action, Supreme Court made findings of fact and issued a judgment stating that plaintiff was entitled to the divorce, but that a final judgment of divorce would not be issued until the resolution of ancillary issues. Although defendant timely filed a notice of appeal, we conclude that this appeal must be dismissed. Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (5) (a) specifically states that, in divorce actions such as the instant one, equitable distribution must be made in the final judgment of divorce. In the absence of a final judgment awarding equitable distribution, a finding of divorce is not effective. Accordingly, the "judgment” appealed from is nothing more than a decision stating the intention on the part of the court to divorce the parties in the future and, as such, is both nonbinding and nonfinal, as well as without legal effect. Because defendant cannot be aggrieved by such a *863"judgment” *(see,*CPLR 5511), dismissal of the appeal is proper. Although we recognize that we have considered appeals such as these in the past *(see, e.g., McKilligan v McKilligan,*156 AD2d 904), we now fully see the futility of such a course and will not consider such an appeal if it is presented to us in the future.

Mahoney, P. J., Levine, Mercure and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.
# C_2016203EN.01003201.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/32

---

Article 80

The Commission may require that any excess special fissile materials recovered or obtained as by products and not actually being used or ready for use shall be deposited with the Agency or in other stores which are or can be supervised by the Commission.

Special fissile materials deposited in this way must be returned forthwith to those concerned at their request.

---
MEMORANDUM 

DATE: January 25, 2015

TO: 111(b) Rule for New Construction of Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013-0495

FROM: Howard J. Hoffman, EPA - OGC

SUBJECT: December 11, 2014 Telephone Call with Profs. Freeman and Gerard Regarding 

Proposed 111(b) Rule for New Construction of Power Plants

On December 11, 2014, Lorie Schmidt, Elliott Zenick, Scott Jordan, Steven Silverman, and 

Howard J. Hoffman of EPA-OGC met by telephone with Jody Freeman of Harvard Law School 

and Michael Gerrard of Columbia Climate Center to discuss legal issues concerning the 

proposed CAA section 111(b) rule for new construction of power plants.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1110 

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 

include an additional permissible use of amounts provided as grants 

under the Byrne JAG program, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 8, 2019 

Mrs. HARTZLER (for herself, Ms. BASS, Mr. CLAY, Mr. CHABOT, and Mr. 

STAUBER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 

Act of 1968 to include an additional permissible use 

of amounts provided as grants under the Byrne JAG 

program, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Empowering Law En5 forcement to Fight Sex Trafficking Demand Act of 2019’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1110 IH

1 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED USE OF BYRNE JAG 

2 FUNDS. 

3 Section 501(a)(1) of the Omnibus Crime Control and 

4 Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10152(a)(1)) is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(I) Programs to combat human traf7 ficking (including programs to reduce the de8 mand for trafficked persons).’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Agricultural Marketing Service, Specialty Crops Program, Specialty Crops Inspection Division

SCALE TOLERANCES FOR DETERMINING NET WEIGHT

Check Weights

Check weights used should be approximately the same weight as the net weight that is being

certified. For example, if a container is marked “25 lbs. Net Wt.,” a 25 lb. check weight or a

combination of check weights weighing a total of 25 lbs. should be used. If an exact weight

combination of check weights is not available, a check weight or combination of check weights

within 5 lbs. above or below the certifying container weight may be used. Exceptions to this rule

must be cleared through DC Operations.

Tolerances

The following tolerances will be used for all digital scales showing 1/100th lb. graduations.

Check Weight/Container Weight Tolerance

0 to 5 lbs. + or - .01 lb.

+5 to 20 lbs. + or - .02 lb.

+20 to 40 lbs. + or - .03 lb.

Over 40 lbs. + or - .05 lb.

For all non-digital type scales graduated in 1/10 lb. or 1/4 lb. increments, allow one half

graduation tolerance. For example, the acceptable range for a non-digital type scale graduated in

1/4 lb. increments when using a 10 lb. check weight would be from one half of the distance from

the 9 3/4 lb. to the 10 lb. graduation to one half of the distance from the 10 lb. to the 10 1/4 lb.

graduation.

Any scale that does not meet the above tolerances will not be acceptable for use in

certifying net weight.

Scale Tolerances for Determining Net Weight (September 2017)

SCI Division Inspection Series

Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                          
<ARTICLE>                      9
<LEGEND>
The Consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of operations of the
company's form 10-Q for the year to date
</LEGEND>                       
<MULTIPLIER>                      1,000
                                
<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                            9,258
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                 18,347
<TRADING-ASSETS>                      0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>      78,044
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                  0
<LOANS>                         147,673
<ALLOWANCE>                       2,369
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  276,267
<DEPOSITS>                      233,434
<SHORT-TERM>                      8,491
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>               3,632
<LONG-TERM>                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<COMMON>                         22,291
<OTHER-SE>                        6,200
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>  276,267
<INTEREST-LOAN>                   3,372
<INTEREST-INVEST>                 1,110
<INTEREST-OTHER>                    262
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                  4,744
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                1,761
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                1,856
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>             2,888
<LOAN-LOSSES>                       104
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                  184
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                   3,282
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     902
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>          605
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                        605
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                      0.14
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                     4.54
<LOANS-NON>                         796
<LOANS-PAST>                          0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                      0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                       0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                  2,294
<CHARGE-OFFS>                        51
<RECOVERIES>                         22
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                 2,369
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                  0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                   0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>               0
                                

</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We have issued our
reports dated November 14, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Lubys, Inc. and its subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended
August 31, 2011. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Lubys, Inc. and its subsidiaries on Form S-3/A (File No. 333-135057, effective October 12, 2006) and on Forms
S-8 (File No. 333-135058, effective June 16, 2006; File No. 333-81606, effective January 29, 2002; File No. 333-81608, effective January 29, 2002; File No. 333-55140, effective February 7, 2001; and
File No. 333-70315, effective January 8, 1999).



|                         
|-------------------------
|/s/    GRANT THORNTON LLP
|                         
|Houston, Texas           
|November 14, 2011
# C_2012326EN.01004701.xml

| 26.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

PART THREE

UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS

UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS

TITLE IV

FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS, SERVICES AND CAPITAL

FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS, SERVICES AND CAPITAL

CHAPTER 4

CAPITAL AND PAYMENTS

Article 64

(ex Article 57 TEC)

(ex Article 57 TEC)

1.   The provisions of Article 63 shall be without prejudice to the application to third countries of any restrictions which exist on 31 December 1993 under national or Union law adopted in respect of the movement of capital to or from third countries involving direct investment – including in real estate – establishment, the provision of financial services or the admission of securities to capital markets. In respect of restrictions existing under national law in Bulgaria, Estonia and Hungary, the relevant date shall be 31 December 1999.

2.   Whilst endeavouring to achieve the objective of free movement of capital between Member States and third countries to the greatest extent possible and without prejudice to the other Chapters of the Treaties, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall adopt the measures on the movement of capital to or from third countries involving direct investment – including investment in real estate – establishment, the provision of financial services or the admission of securities to capital markets.

3.   Notwithstanding paragraph 2, only the Council, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, may unanimously, and after consulting the European Parliament, adopt measures which constitute a step backwards in Union law as regards the liberalisation of the movement of capital to or from third countries.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 16.1

                   LETTER RE: CHANGE IN CERTIFYING ACCOUNTANT

October 31, 2006


Office of the Chief Accountant
Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549

Re:   Aventura Holdings, Inc.
      File Reference No. 814-00703


We were previously the independent registered public accounting firm for
Aventura Holdings, Inc. and under the date of March 27, 2006, we reported on the
financial statements of Aventura Holdings, Inc. as of December 31, 2005 and
2004, and for the period from January 1, 2005 to March 15, 2005 (pre-BDC),
period from March 16, 2005 to December 31, 2005 (post -BDC) and for the years
ended December 31, 2004 and 2003.

On October 31, 2006, we resigned as the independent registered public accounting
firm. We have read Aventura Holdings, Inc.'s statements included in Item 5.01 as
it pertains to Salberg & Company, P.A. on the Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2006 of Aventura Holdings, Inc. to be filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and we agree with such statements.



Very truly yours,
SALBERG & COMPANY, P.A.


/s/ Scott D. Salberg
--------------------
Scott D. Salberg, CPA, CVA
For the Firm
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 15 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 15

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to end 
  the practice of including more than one subject in a single law by 
  requiring that each law enacted by Congress be limited to only one 
subject and that the subject be clearly and descriptively expressed in 
                         the title of the law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2019

Mr. Marino submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to end 
  the practice of including more than one subject in a single law by 
  requiring that each law enacted by Congress be limited to only one 
subject and that the subject be clearly and descriptively expressed in 
                         the title of the law.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Each bill, order, resolution, or vote which must be submitted to 
the President under section 7 of article I of this Constitution shall 
embrace no more than one subject and that subject shall be clearly and 
descriptively expressed in the title of the bill, order, resolution or 
vote.''.
                                 <all>
```
Formal Recommendation by the 

National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) 

to the National Organic Program (NOP)

 

Date: October 28, 2010 

Subject: Sunset Review of Pectin (high methoxy) as listed on §205.606, 

Nonorganically produced agricultural products allowed as 

ingredients in or on processed products labeled as “organic.” 

Chair: Daniel G. Giacomini 

 

 

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following: 

Rulemaking Action X 

 

 

Statement of the Recommendation (Including Recount of Vote): 

 

Pectin (high methoxy), is listed on 205.606. This substance was scheduled to 

sunset off the National List in 2012, was reviewed by the NOSB, and a motion 

was made for the re-listing of this substance at the October 2010 meeting. The 

motion passed by a vote of 13 yes, 1 no, 0 abstentions, 0 absent, and 0 

recusals. 

 

Rationale Supporting Recommendation (including consistency with 

OFPA and NOP): 

 

The Handling Committee’s recommendation covering this material is attached. 

There were no public written or verbal comments opposing the committee’s 

sunset recommendation, and the material was recommended for relisting by 

the full NOSB as shown below. 

 

NOSB Vote: 

Moved: Joe Smillie Second: Tracy Miedema 

Yes: 13 No: 1 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recusal: 0 
National Organic Standards Board 

Handling Committee 

Sunset Recommendation – 2012 

Pectin (High-methoxy) 

August 31, 2010 

List: 205.606 Nonorganically produced agricultural products allowed as 

ingredients in or on processed products labeled as “organic.” 

Pectin ( high-methoxy) 

Committee Summary 

Federal register notice of the sunset of this material elicited no public comments against 

re-listing. 

Review of the original recommendation, historical documents, and public comments 

does not reveal unacceptable risks to the environment, human or animal health as a 

result of the use or manufacture of this material. There is no new information 

contradicting the original recommendation which was the basis for the previous NOSB 

decision to list this material. As a 205.606 listed material, it is subject to commercial 

availability scrutiny for use in organic products. 

Committee Recommendation(s)

The handling committee recommends the renewal of the following substance in this use 

category as published in the final rule: 

Pectin ( high-methoxy) 

Committee Vote: 

Motion: Joe Smillie Second: Steve DeMuri 

Yes: 6 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 1
All Data from EIA Monthly Biodiesel Reports

http://www.eia.gov/biofuels/biodiesel/production/

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

January 110 89

February 110 97

March 110 104 113 93

April 105 114 96

May 105 116 94

June 151 104 110 93

July 103 111 92

August 105 110 100

September 140 105 111 101

October 107 112 99

November 112 112 100

December 122 103 112 115 99

Year

Month

Number of Biodiesel Producers Operating
Exhibit 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Wireless  Telecom Group,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic  Report"),
I, Cyrille Damany, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

     (1) The Periodic  Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2) The information  contained in the Periodic Report fairly  presents,  in
all material respects,  the financial  condition and result of operations of the
Company.



                                                   /s/ Cyrille Damany
                                                   ------------------
                                                   Cyrille Damany
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                                   August 12, 2005



The foregoing  certification  is being  furnished  solely  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section  1350 and is not  being  filed as part of the  Report  or as a  separate
disclosure document.
# C_2012326EN.01039301.xml

| 26.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/391 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/391

---

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

TITLE V

CITIZENS' RIGHTS

CITIZENS' RIGHTS

Article 40

Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections

Every citizen of the Union has the right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections in the Member State in which he or she resides under the same conditions as nationals of that State.

---
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JOHN DAVID WILSON, JR.,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-3396

[July 13, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Martin County; Elizabeth A. Metzger, Judge; L.T. Case No. 21-1100-CA.

John David Wilson, Jr., Indiantown, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sorraya M. SolagesJones, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., CIKLIN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Milton C. David et al., Appellants, v Cornelius Company, Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Firestone Tire and Rubber Company et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents.

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendant. Plaintiffs failed to controvert unequivocal evidence submitted by defendant that it did not manufacture a Model 85-5 beverage tank and that it imprinted its name on every beverage tank it manufactured. Thus, defendant could not have distributed or sold the beverage tank which allegedly caused the injury. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Corning, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.