alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
THEODORE R. KULONCOSKI 

GOVERNOR 

September 21 , 201 0 

Dennis McLerran, Regional Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I 0 

1200 6th Avenue, Suite 900 

Seattle, WA 98101 

RE: Placement ofAstoria Marine Construction on National Priorities List - Concurrence 

Dear Mr. McLerran: 

We have been informed ofU.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 

1 O's plan to place Astoria Marine Construction on the National Priorities List. Oregon 

Department ofEnvironmental Quality (DEQ) staff, after reviewing the facts and 

communicating with local stakeholders, have recommended our concurrence. I agree with 

this recommendation. Therefore, pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(2), this letter serves as 

official documentation ofOregon's concurrence with placement of Astoria Marine 

Construction on the National Priorities List. 

The Astoria Marine Construction site is a boat refurbishment and maintenance yard 

located approximately three miles south ofthe City of Astoria in Clatsop County, Oregon. 

This facility- which sits on the east b:;mk ofthe Lewis and Clark River, about one mile 

upstream ofits confluence with Young's Bay - has been in opcrat ion since the 1920's and 

employed as many as 100 workers during its peak production in the t940-SO's. The 

facility still provides ship repair and refurbishment services and currently employs about 

10 workers. 

EPA's recent inspections show that contamination from historic industrial activities 

is present in site soils and ground\vater on the facility site and has accumulated in Lewis 

and Clark River sediments surrounding the facility. Elevated concentrations ofpetroleum 

constituents, heavy metals and marine pesticides on and near the site pose a threat to 

human health and ecological species. DEQ's records show some minor removal work was 

performed by the site owners in the mid-1 990's, but the most recent data show that 

remedial action is needed. 

STATE CAPITOL, SALEM 97301-4047 (503) 378-3111 FAX (503) 378-4863 TIY (503) 378-4859 

WWW. GOVERNOR. STATE. OR. US 
Dennis McLerran, Regional Administrator 

September 21, 201 0 

Page Two 

I fully support listing the Astoria Marine Construction site on the National 

Priorities List. Placing this site on the National Priorities List is a critical step to protect 

the health oflocal residents, threatened and endangered fish species, and recreational water 

users. 

TRK:mc:jb 

c: 	 Dan Opalski, USEP A Region I 0 

Dick Pedersen, Director, Oregon DEQ
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION No. 04-08-00758- CV R a y BASALDUA , I n d i v i d u al l y an d d / b / a B as al d

u a R o o fi n g , Appellant
v. Har old HADDEN and Sandra Hadde n , Appellee s Fr om the 81st J udicial District Court, Fr io County , Texas

Tri al C ou rtNo. 06 -09 -00 30 3C VF Honora ble Donna S. Ray es, Judge Pre siding PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Just ice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: September 30, 2009 DI SMI SSED Ray Ba saldua, Individually

and d/b/a B asaldua

Roofing a

ppeals t h e t ri al cour

t’s judgme nt signe d J uly

15, 2008. Appellant’s brief on the m erits was orig inally due J une 10, 2009. On June 26, 200 9 , we gra n t ed appellant an extension until Aug ust 10, 2009, to file the brief. I n our orde r g ranting the extension, we noted t hat no further extensions would be gra nted. Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time was filed. On Aug ust 24, 2009, we orde red a ppellant to file, not later04
- 08
- 00 75 8- CV

- 2- tha n ten day s fro m th e date of the or de r, a

wr itt e n r e sp on se re a so na bly e xpla ini nghis fa ilure to tim e ly fi le the br ie f. Ap pe lla

nt h a s n ot f

ile d a br ie f o r t he wr itt e n r e sp on se or de re d b y the c ourt . W e therefor e order this appeal dismissed for wa nt of prosec ution. W e fur ther order th at
a pp e lle e s, Ha

ro ld H a dd e n a

nd Sand ra Ha dd e n, re c ov e r t

he ir c os ts i n th is a

pp e a l f ro m a pp e lla nt.

PER C URI AM
Exhibit 10.40

December 1, 2000

Eric Dix
301 Silverhill Rd.
Newark, NY  14513

Dear Eric:

This shall serve to confirm what we have discussed over the past couple of weeks
regarding your continued employment at Ultralife. You had expressed a desire to
have an increased sense of job security, including severance provisions, as you
are contemplating the purchase of a home locally.

To that end, pending approval by the Board of Directors on December 5th, should
your employment be terminated by the Company, except for "cause" (which shall be
defined as gross negligence, willful misconduct, illegal drug use, theft or
conviction of a felony), you will be entitled to one-year of continuation of
salary, benefits and stock option vesting and exercise.

Any reduction in salary or meaningful reduction of responsibility may, at the
employee's discretion, be construed as an involuntary termination and all of the
above terms apply.

Additionally, subject to shareholder authorization of the Company's 2000 Stock
Option Plan, and subject to Board approval, you will be granted an additional
75,000 stock options of Ultralife common shares which vest over a five-year
period, the price of which will be determined by the Board at its December 5,
2000 meeting.

I trust this will satisfactorily address your concerns.

Yours very truly,

/s/ JOHN D. KAVAZANJIAN
-----------------------
John D. Kavazanjian

cc:  Pete Comerford

                             Ultralife Confidential
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 29, 2018

No. 04-18-00373-CV

Robert ZAYAS dba Clinic Services Providers P.A.,

Appellants

v.

Dolly R. DENSON,

Appellee

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CI16539

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

A filing fee of $205.00 was due when appellant filed his notice of appeal, but it was not 

paid. See TEXAS SUPREME COURT ORDER REGARDING FEES CHARGED IN THE SUPREME COURT,

IN CIVIL CASES IN THE COURTS OF APPEALS, AND BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON 

MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION (Misc. Docket No. 159158, Aug. 28, 2015). The clerk of this court 

notified appellant by letter the filing fee was due by June 21, 2018. The fee remains unpaid. 

Rule 5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides:

A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay—

at the time an item is presented for filing—whatever fees are required by statute 

or Supreme Court order. The appellate court may enforce this rule by any order 

that is just.

TEX. R. APP. P. 5. 

We therefore ORDER appellant must either (1) pay the filing fee or (2) provide written 

proof to this court that he is indigent or otherwise excused by statute or the Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure from paying the fee. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1 (providing that indigent party 

who complies with provisions of that rule may proceed without advance payment of costs). If 

appellant fails to respond satisfactorily by July 9, 2018, this appeal will be dismissed. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3.

All other appellate deadlines are suspended pending the payment of the filing fee.
_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 29th day of June, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5488 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5488

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on low expansion laboratory 
                   glassware, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on low expansion laboratory 
                   glassware, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. LOW EXPANSION LABORATORY GLASSWARE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.12.39 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended--
            (1) in the article description column, by striking 
        ``10<SUP>-7</SUP>'' and inserting ``10<SUP>-6</SUP>''; and
            (2) in effective period column, by striking ``12/31/2009'' 
        and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section apply 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>
```
|                                                                                                          
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                                      
|View History:                                                                                             
|                                                                                                          
|New Mexico Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs, Wet (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                          
|                                                                                                          
|New Mexico Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs, Wet (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 74     | 66     | 109    | 122   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 125    | 126    | 132    | 140    | 160    | 272    | 322    | 294    | 337    | 408   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 557    | 662    | 650    | 1,029  | 1,653  | 1,949  | 2,638  | 5,521  | 7,327  | 8,020 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 8,047  | 10,026 |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
#### FLETCHER v. STATE.

No. 25347.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 13, 1951.

Motion to Reinstate Appeal Denied Oct. 10, 1951.

See also, Tex.Cr.App., 229 S.W.2d 74.

W. M. Tucker, Wellington, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for the sale of whiskey in a dry area, wherein the punishment was assessed by the jury at a fine of $400.

Notice of appeal was given on March 21, 1951, when the motion for new trial was overruled.

The recognizance entered into by appellant and his sureties bears date of March 19, 1951, and appears to have been approved and entered on March 20, 1951, which was ■before the' notice of appeal was given, and in fact before the motion for new trial had been filed.

Until an appeal has been taken, the trial court is not authorized to permit the accused to enter into a recognizance on appeal. See Hallman v. State, 113 Tex.Cr.R. 100, 18 S.W.2d 652.

In the absence of a sufficient appeal bond or recognizance or a showing that appellant is in jail, this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal. See Locke v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 225 S.W.2d 179; Brackeen v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 225 S.W.2d 180.

The appeal- is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.

On Motion to Reinstate Appeal

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant moves to reinstate his appeal, insisting that the recognizance was properly entered into.

No necessity exists to determine this question, for, in addition to the defective recognizance, no notice of appeal was properly given in the trial court.

The notice of.appeal appears as a memorandum by the trial judge attached to appellant’s motion for new trial-

*378Under 'the mandatory provisions of Art. 827, C.C.P., notice of appeal in a criminal case must be entered of record, which means in the minutes of the court.

The motion to reinstate the appeal is overruled.

Opinion approved by the Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-10952

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANDRES HERNANDEZ, JR., also known as Gordo,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:12-CR-220

Before DAVIS, JONES and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Andres Hernandez, Jr., has moved 

for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 

(5th Cir. 2011). Hernandez has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s 

brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as 

Hernandez’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 27, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-10952 Document: 00513172173 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/27/2015
No. 14-10952

2

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 

Hernandez’s motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED.

 Case: 14-10952 Document: 00513172173 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/27/2015
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO WAO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS LLC

vs.

ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA), INC.,

ZTE (TX), INC.

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL NO:

WA:20-CV-00488-ADA

ORDER CANCELLINGMARKMAN MARKMANHEARING HEARING

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case having been set

for MARKMAN HEARING on Friday,

until further order of the court.

May 21, 2021 at 09:00 AMis hereby CANCELLED

IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of May, 2021.

Alan D Albright

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00488-ADA Document 79 Filed 05/18/21 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5                                                 EXHIBIT 27
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                           <C>      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       13,439
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               120,648
<ALLOWANCES>                                 10,243
<INVENTORY>                                  84,361
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            213,067
<PP&E>                                       79,367
<DEPRECIATION>                               43,242
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              426,928
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       175,610
<BONDS>                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                      3,154
<OTHER-SE>                                  233,498
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                426,928
<SALES>                                     102,060
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            102,060
<CGS>                                        52,633
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                52,633
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             42,873
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                352
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            1,886
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               3,917
<INCOME-TAX>                                  1,724
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           2,193
<DISCONTINUED>                              (33,952)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                (31,759)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (1.77)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (1.77)
        



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 

Case 6:20-cv-00465-ADA Document 29-16 Filed 10/02/20 Page 1 of 3
10/1/2020 Flights

https://www.google.com/flights?lite=0#flt=KOA.ACT.2020-10-30*ACT.KOA.2020-11-03;c:USD;e:1;sd:1;t:f 1/2

Nightly prices for 1 guest Nov 1–Nov 3 Search for hotels 

Best depaing ights

Other depaing ights

Hotels in Waco

Date grid Price graph Nearby airports

Travel update

Coronavirus (COVID-19) may impact travel. See travel advice

Additional bag fees and other fees may apply. Sort by:

10:35 PM – 3:21 PM

Ameri... · Operated by Envoy Air as Ameri...

36h 46m

KOA–ACT PHX, SAN, DFW

$529

round trip

+2 3 stops

10:35 PM – 11:28 AM

Ameri... · Operated by Envoy Air as Ameri...

32h 53m

KOA–ACT PHX, DFW

$564

round trip

+2 2 stops

10:35 PM – 3:21 PM

Ameri... · Operated by Envoy Air as Ameri...

11h 46m

KOA–ACT

2 stops

PHX, DFW

$584

round trip

+1

11:15 AM – 11:28 AM

Hawaiian, A... · Operated by Envoy Air as ...

19h 13m

KOA–ACT

2 stops

OGG, DFW

$909

round trip

+1

4:15 PM – 11:28 AM

Hawaiian, A... · Operated by Envoy Air as ...

14h 13m

KOA–ACT

2 stops

HNL, DFW

$914

round trip

+1

11:15 AM – 3:21 PM

Hawaiian, A... · Operated by Envoy Air as ...

23h 6m

KOA–ACT

3 stops

OGG, PHX, DFW

$768

round trip

+1

3:22 PM – 3:21 PM

Alaska, A... · Operated by Envoy Air as A...

18h 59m

KOA–ACT SEA, DFW

$2,647

round trip

+1 2 stops

9:40 PM – 3:21 PM

Alaska, A... · Operated by Envoy Air as A...

12h 41m

KOA–ACT

2 stops

SEA, DFW

$3,479

round trip

+1

105 more flights

Round trip 1 passenger Economy

Kailua-Kona KOA Waco ACT Fri, Oct 30 Tue, Nov 3

Bags Stops Airlines Price Times Connecting airports More

Sign in

Exhibit 13, Page 1

Case 6:20-cv-00465-ADA Document 29-16 Filed 10/02/20 Page 2 of 3
10/1/2020 Flights

https://www.google.com/flights?lite=0#flt=KOA.ACT.2020-10-30*ACT.KOA.2020-11-03;c:USD;e:1;sd:1;t:f 2/2

Hilton Waco

4.4 (900)

Hotel Indigo

W Bl 4.5 (765)

Holiday Inn

E &S i 4.4 (529)

Explore more destinations from Kailua-Kona

$94 $123 $106

Flights Language · English Country · United States Currency · USD

Find the cheapest and best flight for you.

About Google Privacy & Terms Help Center and Consumer Information

Displayed currencies may differ from the currencies used to purchase flights. Learn more.

Sign in

Exhibit 13, Page 2

Case 6:20-cv-00465-ADA Document 29-16 Filed 10/02/20 Page 3 of 3
#### FLOYD v. STATE.

No. 25488.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 7, 1951.

N. C. Outlaw, Post, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The transcript in this appeal contains no final judgment rendered by the trial court.

This court is therefore without jurisdiction to enter any order other than to dismiss the appeal. See Lutz v. State, 146 Tex.Cr.R. 158, 172 S.W.2d 342.

The appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
#### JORDAN et al. v. JORDAN et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 28, 1954.

Rehearing Denied June 25, 1954.

*639WV H. Hooks and Diederich & Lycan, Ashland, for appellant.

Baxter Arnett, Ashland, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from a judgment denying W. H. Hooks an attorney’s fee of $300, claimed by him for services in conducting through court the sale of jointly owned real estate for a division of the proceeds. The chancellor found that Hooks, before the sale, had acquired a one-half interest in the property and was entitled to no fee as to this one-half interest because he had represented himself. The chancellor also found that the owner of the other one-half interest in the property was represented by her own attorney in the litigation and disallowed Hooks’ claim of attorney’s fee against the fund payable to her committee. ’ We conclude the evidence sustains the action of the chancellor.

The motion is overruled and the judgment is affirmed.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5469 

To suspend temporarily the duty on manganese flake. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. REED introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on manganese flake. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MANGANESE FLAKE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Manganese flake containing at least 99.5 percent by weight of manganese (provided for in 

subheading 8111.00.47) .... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

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

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 5469 IH

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS