alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 190 (Friday, September 29, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 58593]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25059]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3425]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Korean Art: Ancient to Modern Times''

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
[79 Stat. 985, 22 U.S.C. 2459], the Foreign Affairs Reform and 
Restructuring Act of 1998 [112 Stat. 2681 et seq.], Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999 [64 FR 56014], and Delegation of 
Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999 [64 FR 57920], as amended by 
Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 [65 FR 53795], I 
hereby determine that two additional objects to be included in the 
exhibit, ``Korean Art: Ancient to Modern Times,'' imported from abroad 
for the temporary exhibition without profit within the United States, 
are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a 
loan agreement with a foreign lender. I also determine that the 
temporary exhibition or display of the objects at the Los Angeles 
County Museum of Art, Los Angeles, California, from on or about October 
1, 2000, to on or about October 11, 2001, is in the national interest. 
Public Notice of these determinations is ordered to be published in the 
Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, 202/619-5997, and the address is Room 700, 
United States Department of State, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20547-0001.

    Dated: September 21, 2000.
Helena Kane Finn,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 00-25059 Filed 9-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-U
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) 

v. ) CRIMINAL NO. A-20-CR-047-RP

) 

MARIA TERESA BENITEZ-UGARTE ET AL.

Defendants.

MOTION TO UNSEAL INDICTMENT 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

Comes now the United States of America, by and through the United States Attorney for 

the Western District of Texas, and respectfully requests that the Court Unseal the Government=s 

Indictment and associated documents filed in the above-styled cause number for all eighteen 

Defendants.

Respectfully submitted,

ASHLEY C. HOFF

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: 

Mark H. Marshall

Assistant United States Attorney

903 San Jacinto Blvd. Suite 334 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Ph: (512) 916-5858 

State Bar No. 13032500 

Case 1:20-cr-00047-RP Document 281 Filed 02/24/21 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CRIMINAL NO. A-20-CR-047-RP

)

MARIA TERESA BENITEZ-UGARTE ET AL.

Defendants.

ORDER

Came on to be considered United States Motion to Unseal Government=s Indictment and 

associated documents filed in the above-styled cause number for all eighteen Defendants and the 

Court having considered said motion, hereby

ORDERS that United States' Motion to Unseal Government=s Indictment, and associated 

documents be GRANTED with respect to all defendants. 

ENTERED this day of February 2021.

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cr-00047-RP Document 281 Filed 02/24/21 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5212 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5212

       To suspend temporarily the duty on amino ethyl carbazole.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

 Mr. Mulvaney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To suspend temporarily the duty on amino ethyl carbazole.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AMINO ETHYL CARBAZOLE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        3-Amino N-Ethyl     Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          Carbazole (amino                                                  12/31/2015
                          ethyl carbazole)
                          (CAS No. 132-32-
                          1) (provided for
                          in subheading
                          2933.99.97)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.1

                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Paul Mitrokostas, certify that:

1.       I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K in respect of the
         Corporate Backed Trust Certificates, BellSouth Debenture-Backed
         Series 2002-8 Trust (the "Trust") and all reports on Form 8-K
         containing distribution or servicing reports of the Trust filed in
         respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report
         of the Trust;

2.       Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
         whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this
         annual report;

3.       Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
         required to be provided to the Depositor by the Trustee under the
         pooling and servicing or similar agreement, for inclusion in these
         reports is included in these reports; and

4.       I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
         Depositor and the Trustee under the pooling and servicing or similar
         agreement and based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance
         review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the
         reports, the Depositor and Trustee have each fulfilled its
         obligations under that agreement.


In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank Trust National
Association, as Trustee.

Date: March 29, 2004


         /s/ PAUL MITROKOSTAS
-----------------------------------------
Paul Mitrokostas, Senior Vice President


                                      7
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5054 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5054

    To extend the suspension of duty on Acetoacetyl-2,5-dimethoxy-4-
                             chloroanilide.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

  Mr. Frank of Massachusetts introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To extend the suspension of duty on Acetoacetyl-2,5-dimethoxy-4-
                             chloroanilide.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ACETOACETYL-2,5-DIMETHOXY-4-CHLOROANILIDE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.64 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Acetoacetyl-2,5-dimethoxy-4-
chloroanilide) is amended by striking the date in the effective period 
column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies to 
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC

Michael Pelzer and Pegasus Parachuting Services Complainant, FAA Docket No. 16-16-05 

### v. The State ofMichigan Respondent.

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the above

referenced complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rul es of Practice for Federally AssistedAirport Enforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR Part 16 (Rules ofPractice). Pursuant to the Rules of Practice, Section 16.11 (a), the date 

### by which the Director's Determination will be issued in this matter is hereby extended to November 15 , 2016. An extension oftime is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination in this case.

Kevin Date Directo , Office of Airport Compliance and nagement AnalysisCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 16, 2016, I caused to be placed in the United States mail (first class mail , postage paid), a true copy ofthe Notice ofExtension ofTime to November 15,2016, for FAA Docket 16-16-05 addressed to: Counsel for Complainants Richard 

### J
. Durden Richard J. Durden, Attorney at Law 27987 Richmond Hill Road Conifer, CO 80433 Respondent Mike Trout Executive Administrator, Office ofAeronautics Michigan Department ofTransportation 2700 Port Lansing Road Lansing,MI48906
Copy to: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket FAA Airport Compliance Division (AC0

- 1 00)

Claudia Roberts Office ofAirport Compliance and, Management Analysis
Exhibit 32.2

Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of American States Water Company and Golden State Water Company (the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Robert J. Sprowls, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

|/s/ROBERT J. SPROWLSRobert J. Sprowls Senior Vice PresidentFinance,
Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|Date: November 9, 2007                                                                                                |  | 

---



QuickLinks
#### HENDERSON v. STATE.

No. 25393.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 17, 1951.

No attorney for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was charged by complaint and information with the offense of driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated. Pie pleaded guilty before the court who found him guilty and assessed a fine of $50.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts and no bills of exception. All the proceedings appear to be regular. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARLON CRAWFORD,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-1658

[August 23, 2018]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Barbara R. Duffy, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 04-17461CF10A.

Marlon Crawford, Milton, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

TAYLOR, MAY and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5248 

To extend and modify the temporary suspension of duty on Poly(toluene 

diisocyanate). 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend and modify the temporary suspension of duty 

on Poly(toluene diisocyanate). 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. POLY(TOLUENE DIISOCYANATE). 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.12.04 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 poly(toluene diisocyanate)) is amended— 

7 (1) by amending the article description to read 

8 as follows: ‘‘Poly(toluene diisocyanate) (CAS No. 

9 26006–20–2), whether or not dissolved in organic 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5248 IH

1 solvents (provided for in subheading 3911.90.45)’’; 

2 and 

3 (2) by striking the date in the effective period 

4 column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

6 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

7 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

8 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             362,084
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      221,442
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        142,392
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   897,167
<PP&E>                                           5,118,992
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,551,471
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,854,606
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,526,444
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           272,500
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,730,049
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,854,606
<SALES>                                          2,793,265
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,793,265
<CGS>                                              514,752
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,948,791
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 518,277
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (559,650)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (559,650)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     (21,970)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (581,620)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.08)
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-1210

CEDRICK E. DRAPER,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE C/O MEGAN J. BRENNAN 

POSTMASTER GENERAL,

 Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at 

Charlottesville. Glen E. Conrad, Senior District Judge. (3:18-cv-00070-GEC)

Submitted: September 29, 2020 Decided: October 26, 2020

Before KING, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cedrick Euron Draper, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Cedrick Euron Draper appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action 

without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order. We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Draper v. U.S. Postal Serv., No. 3:18-cv-00070-GEC (W.D. Va. Sept. 26, 2018). 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 99.13**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-170295 on Form S-8 and to the use of our reports dated March 7, 2012 relating to the consolidated financial statements of HudBay Minerals Inc. (the “Company”) and the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2011.

 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

 

 

Toronto, Canada April 2, 2012

 

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS LICENSED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

 

----
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A1170, A16A1190. JONES v. CARROLL (Two cases.) 

In this review of the imposition of discovery sanctions and the award of

attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 (b), we granted appellant’s applications for

discretionary review in an excess of caution, given the limited facts stated in the

application and in order to review the appellant’s contentions with the benefit of the

entire record in both cases.

A careful and complete review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties

leaves no doubt that, under the standard of review we must apply, there is no basisfor

reversal on any ground alleged. Had the facts apparent from the entire record been

included in the applications, discretionary review would not have been granted.

Therefore, upon consideration of the entire record, applicable case law, and statutory

provisions, these discretionary appeals are hereby dismissed as having been

improvidently granted. See Woody v. State, 247 Ga. App. 684, 685 (545 SE2d 83)

(2001).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

11/02/2016

November 02, 2016
|                                                                                   
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                   
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                     
|View History: Annual                                                               
|View History: Annual                                                               
|View History:                                                                      
|                                                                                   
|Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                   
|                                                                                   
|Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                   

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 587   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 405    | 1,405  | 6,895  | 334    | 434    | 5,034  | 62     | 493    | 1,424  | 487   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 721    | 88     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7775

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JAMES ALLEN BULLOCK, a/k/a Man,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief

District Judge. (CR-92-194-D)

Submitted: April 29, 1999 Decided: May 4, 1999

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Allen Bullock, Appellant Pro Se. John Warren Stone, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

James Allen Bullock appeals the district court’s order denying

his motion for production of transcripts at government expense. We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Bullock, No. CR-92-194-D

(M.D.N.C. Nov. 23, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
#### DANIEL v. STATE.

No. 23864.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 7, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The offense is possession of whisky for the purpose of sale in a dry area; the punishment, a fine of $100.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. Nothing is presented for the consideration of this court.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.