alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                   
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                   
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                     
|View History: Annual                                                                               
|View History: Annual                                                                               
|View History:                                                                                      
|                                                                                                   
|Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                   

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 42    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 21     | 15     | 43     | 39     | 59     | 13     | 135    | 188    | 20     | 226   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 14     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Joseph Moczulski, Deceased. Joanne Labriola, as Executrix of Joseph Moczulski, Deceased, Respondent; John C. Moczulski, Appellant.

Appeal from an order and decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Albany County (Marinelli, S.), entered September 25, 1989, which, *inter alia,*admitted to probate an instrument purporting to be the last will and testament of decedent.

Since respondent had already been granted several adjournments of his trial, including one for receipt of a handwriting expert’s report and another to retain new counsel, Surrogate’s Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the objections and granting probate of the will in question *(see, Scarola v St. Vincent’s Med. Center,*154 AD2d 364; *Matter of Alario v DeMarco,*149 AD2d 587, *appeal dismissed*74 NY2d 791). That respondent’s rights to proceed were diligently protected by the court are evidenced in the fact that the court stayed its final order for seven days to allow respondent one final opportunity to proceed to trial. However, at the end of that time he was still not prepared to go forward.

Order and decree affirmed, without costs. Kane, J. P., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Mercure, JJ., concur.
|                                                                                                                               
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                               
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                                                           
|View History:                                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                                               
|Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                               
|                                                                                                                               
|Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 69     | 206    | 166    | 342   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 139    | 781    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 28, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 14648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04113]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-11728-01-R9]


Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Order on Petition for 
Objection to State Operating Permit for Agua Fria Generating Station

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final order on petition.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator signed 
an order dated January 30, 2024, granting in part and denying in part a 
petition dated June 1, 2023, from Sierra Club. The petition requested 
that the EPA object to a Clean Air Act (CAA) title V operating permit 
issued by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) to the 
Salt River Project Agricultural Power District (SRP) Agua Fria 
Generating Station for its electricity generating station located in 
Glendale, Arizona.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Valladolid, EPA Region 9, 
(415) 947-4103, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e2b4838e8e83868d8e8b86cc8183968a87908b8c87a2879283cc858d94"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f2a4939e9e93969d9e9b96dc9193869a97809b9c97b2978293dc959d84">[email protected]</span></a>. The final order and 
petition are available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/title-v-petition-database.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    The EPA received a petition from Sierra Club dated June 1, 2023, 
requesting that the EPA object to the issuance of operating permit no. 
P0009346, issued by MCAQD to SRP Agua Fria Generating Station in 
Glendale, Arizona. On January 30, 2024, the EPA Administrator issued an 
order granting in part and denying in part the petition. The order 
itself explains the basis for the EPA's decision.
    Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the CAA provide that a petitioner 
may request judicial review of those portions of an order that deny 
issues in a petition. Any petition for review shall be filed in the 
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit no later 
than April 29, 2024.

    Dated: February 21, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-04113 Filed 2-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### ECKLES v. STATE.

No. 26597.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 3, 1954.

Grady West, Lubbock, for appellant.

Dudley Brummett, County Atty., Lub-bpck, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The record has -been- perfected by supplemental transcript which 'shows -'that ap*99pellant, with his sureties, entered into -a recognizance on appeal. The appeal is therefore reinstated and will be disposed of on' its merits.

The injured party was, at the time of the alleged offense, the wife of appellant. She testified on direct examination that on the morning of January 18, 1953, her brother-in-law came to the home of appellant and the prosecuting witness, in Lubbock. He was on his way to Teague, intending to take the train at Slaton that night.

The brother-in-law wanted to know if he would go through Brownwood on his journey to Teague, and appellant suggested that he would probably go through Fort Worth.

The prosecuting witness testified that shortly after the brother-in-law departed she suggested that it appeared to her that one would go through Brownwood going to Teague, whereupon appellant began beating her as she sat at the breakfast table, striking her on the head and arms and causing her to have a black eye and bruises on her arm, shoulder, neck, head and hip.

Appellant did not testify and the state relied solely upon the above testimony of his then wife, who had since the assault secured a divorce.

It is insisted that on cross-examination the prosecuting witness destroyed her credibility as a witness and the entire weight of her testimony when she testified that “the alleged assault had occurred on the following morning” and not on January 18, 1953.

The - testimony on cross-examination relied upon to support such contention is as follows:

> “Q. And you • immediately filed your suit for divorce, didn’t you? A. On the 20th.

> “Q. That be Tuesday? A. Wednesday — 21st.

> “Q. Isn’t it a'fact that'the argument that you claimed you and Walter had, happened on Monday afternoon' about 1 o’clock? A. No, sir.-! Well, it-happened, when I was leaving, *.that is when he got mad.*

> “Q. Monday .afternoon about 1 o’clock? A. Yes, sir, about 12:15 when I was leaving. . '

> “Q. Where were you planning • on going? A. I was going home to my parents.”

As we view this testimony: the witness was not referring to the assault which she had testified happened shortly after her brother-in-law left, but to an argument which occurred when she was leaving the following day.

We find nothing to indicate, perjury in the, testimony of this witness. Furthermore, we know of no rule of law under which we 'would be authorized to find the testimony insufficient to sustain the conviction.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1



Section 1350 Certification

(Chief Executive Officer)



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 Annual Report of
Chaparral Steel Company. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Tommy A. Valenta, Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (i) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: August 25, 2005



/s/ Tommy A. ValentaTommy A. ValentaChief Executive Officer
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-92,027-01

EX PARTE RONNIE LEE NATHO, SR., Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. CR6193A IN THE 33RD DISTRICT COURT

FROM LLANO COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant was convicted of misapplication of fiduciary property of an elderly individual and

sentenced to twenty-five years’ imprisonment. The Third Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. 

Natho v. State, No. 03-11-00498-CR (Tex. App. — Austin Feb. 6, 2014) (not designated for

publication). Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction,

and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends that trial counsel was ineffective because counsel failed to challenge the

competency of the complainant pursuant to Texas Rule of Evidence 601, based on the fact that she

suffered from Alzheimer’s disease at the time she gave the deposition that was introduced at trial,

failed to cross-examine the complainant during that deposition in order to impeach her on the basis
2

of her mental condition, and failed to object when the complainant’s grand-daughter, who was

present during the deposition, testified at trial after Texas Rule of Evidence 614 (“the rule”) had been

invoked during the deposition and at trial. 

Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984). Accordingly, the record should be developed. The trial court is the appropriate

forum for findings of fact. TEX.CODECRIM.PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court shall order trial

counsel to respond to Applicant’s claims. In developing the record, the trial court may use any

means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine

whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wants to be represented by counsel, the

trial court shall appoint counsel to represent him at the hearing. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art.

26.04. If counsel is appointed or retained, the trial court shall immediately notify this Court of

counsel’s name.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whethertrial counsel’s

performance was deficient and Applicant was prejudiced. The trial court may make any other

findings and conclusions that it deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claims.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from

the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s

findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,

affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from

hearings and depositions. See TEX.R.APP. P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested

by the trial court and obtained from this Court.
3

Filed: December 9, 2020

Do not publish
Exhibit 32.2
                                                                    ------------



              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Paragon Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald
J. Semanick, Chief Financial 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



                           /s/ Ronald J. Semanick
                           -----------------------------------------------------
                           Ronald J. Semanick
                           Chief Financial Officer and Vice President - Finance
                             and Treasurer
                           August 12, 2005
|                                                                               
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                               
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                 
|View History: Annual                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                           
|View History:                                                                  
|                                                                               
|North Dakota Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted in Illinois (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                               
|                                                                               
|North Dakota Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted in Illinois (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 1,291  | 1,454  | 1,404  | 10,431 | 10,195 | 7,372  | 6,990  | 6,067 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 5,756  | 6,357  | 5,330  |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
Exhibit 31

                                  CERTIFICATION

      I, Peter Zachariou, certify that:

      I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of PRIMA EASTWEST MODEL
MANAGEMENT, INC.;

      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;

      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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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 small
business issuer 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 small business issuer,
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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

      The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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:  September 28, 2005

/s/ Peter Zachariou
-------------------
Peter Zachariou
Principal Executive Officer and Principal
Financial Officer