alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). 

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than October 20, 2000. 

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago**                     (Phillip Jackson, Applications Officer) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:                 

*1. John Mark DeCook,*                     Pella, Iowa, and Martin “Bruce” Heerema, Pella, Iowa; each to retain voting shares of Vermeer Investment Company, Pella, Iowa, and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of Marion County State Bank, Pella, Iowa.                 

*2. Raymond James Schirmer,*                     and Robert Lawrence Foust, both of Strawberry Point, Iowa; to acquire additional voting shares of Munter Agency, Inc., Strawberry Point, Iowa, and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares of Union Bank and Trust Company, Strawberry Point, Iowa.                 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 2, 2000. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 00-25667 Filed 10-5-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION 

WSOU INVESTMENTS LLC,

 Plaintiff 

-vDELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., DELL 

INC., EMC CORPORATION, 

 Defendant 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

6-20-cv-00473 

6-20-cv-00478 

ORDER TO PAY TECHNICAL ADVISOR 

The Court previously appointed Dr. Joshua J. Yi to serve as a technical advisor on this 

case. The Court has reviewed Dr. Yi’s invoice for services through today and finds the requested 

amount to be reasonable and necessary. As such, the Court ORDERS payment to be promptly 

made as follows: 

Plaintiff: $6,165.53 

Defendant: $6,165.53 

Dr. Yi will separately provide deposit instructions. 

SIGNED this 27th day of May, 2021. 

ALAN D ALBRIGHT 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 6:20-cv-00478-ADA Document 107 Filed 05/27/21 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          10,885
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   90,999
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,040
<INVENTORY>                                     97,445
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               217,983
<PP&E>                                         296,925
<DEPRECIATION>                                 132,092
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 448,798
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          110,463
<BONDS>                                         96,069
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,752
<OTHER-SE>                                     191,502
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   448,798
<SALES>                                        433,363
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               433,363
<CGS>                                          339,249
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  339,249
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,656
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 36,160
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             23,960
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    23,960
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.88
        

</TABLE>
Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Notices 60647

[FR Doc. 00–26175 Filed 10–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–10–C

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 00–77]

36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense

Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is

publishing the unclassified text of a

section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification.

This is published to fulfill the

requirements of section 155 of Public

Law 104–164 dated 21 July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

J. Hurd, DSCA/COMPT/RM, (703) 604–

6575.

The following is a copy of a letter to

the Speaker of the House of

Representatives, Transmittal 00–77 with

attached transmittal, policy justification,

and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: October 5, 2000.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

BILLING CODE 5001–10–M

60648 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Notices

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Notices 60649

60650 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Notices

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 198 / Thursday, October 12, 2000 / Notices 60651

[FR Doc. 00–26176 Filed 10–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–10–C
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5480 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5480

 To suspend temporarily the duty on light emitting diode (LED) display 
                             modules (LDM).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    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 light emitting diode (LED) display 
                             modules (LDM).

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

SECTION 1. LIGHT EMITTING DIODE (LED) DISPLAY MODULES (LDM).

    (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        Light emitting      Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          diode (LED)                                                       12/31/2015
                          display modules
                          (LDM) (provided
                          for in subheading
                          9405.40.80)......

    (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>
```
#### SALAS v. STATE.

No. 25387.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 17, 1951.

Hamilton & Hamilton, Matador, for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted for the murder of Lorenzo Santos. The appeal is from a sentence of not less than, two nor more than three years in the penitentiary.

 The evidence is sufficient to sustain the jury’s verdict. We find no fundamental error in the record. There are no bills of exception and nothing is presented for our consideration.

Able oral argument was presented in this case in which the contention was made that the court committed error in the matter of admission of testimony. This could only be brought forward by bill of exception, which was not done.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           4,762
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  101,906
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,524
<INVENTORY>                                     61,366
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               173,367
<PP&E>                                          83,852
<DEPRECIATION>                                  54,818
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 243,287
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          120,062
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,154
<OTHER-SE>                                     107,211
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   243,287
<SALES>                                        229,960
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               229,960
<CGS>                                          127,143
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  127,143
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               100,156
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 (893)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,483
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,076
<INCOME-TAX>                                       430
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                646
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       646
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.05


</TABLE>
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO LIFT STAY

PAGE 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION

NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC.,

Plaintiff,

v. 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD. 

AND SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS 

AMERICA, INC.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-00507-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO LIFT STAY

Having considered the Joint Motion to Lift Stay Pursuant to This Court’s August 11, 2021 

Order filed by plaintiff Neonode Smartphone LLC and defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. 

and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and good cause appearing, the Court hereby ORDERS 

that the stay in this case is lifted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

SIGNED this _________ day of _______, 2023.

Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 63-2 Filed 01/18/23 Page 1 of 1
Appendix P

Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 71-18 Filed 04/14/23 Page 1 of 4
Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 71-18 Filed 04/14/23 Page 2 of 4
Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 71-18 Filed 04/14/23 Page 3 of 4
Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 71-18 Filed 04/14/23 Page 4 of 4
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF THE COMPANY AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                       3,224,993
<SECURITIES>                                34,749,980
<RECEIVABLES>                               92,388,608
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,318,643
<INVENTORY>                                 87,579,727
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           228,462,920
<PP&E>                                      68,664,774
<DEPRECIATION>                              20,264,568
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             281,885,760
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       73,123,911
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,181,384
<OTHER-SE>                                 203,881,525
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               281,885,760
<SALES>                                    228,067,042
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           231,856,308
<CGS>                                      122,368,139
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              122,368,139
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             37,631,749
<INCOME-TAX>                                15,052,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         22,579,049
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                22,579,049
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.54
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

ALLISON KING,

 Plaintiff,

v.

BAYLOR UNIVERSITY,

 Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

6-20-CV-00504-ADA

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge 

Jeffrey C. Mankse. ECF No. 49. The Report recommends that this Court grant Defendant’s 

Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31), and that Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 28) be 

dismissed with prejudice. Because the Report recommends dismissal on the merits, the Report 

further recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Interim Class Counsel (ECF No. 

27) be denied. The Report and Recommendation was filed on January 1, 2021.

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and 

recommendations of the magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of 

the report and recommendation, thereby securing de novo review by the district court. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). A district court need not consider “[f]rivolous, conclusive, or 

general objections.” Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987) (quoting 

Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other 

grounds by Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996)). 

Plaintiff filed objections on February 11, 2021. ECF No. 50. The Court has conducted a 

de novo review of the motion to dismiss and motion to remand, the responses, the report and 

recommendation, the objections to the report and recommendation, and the applicable laws. 

Case 6:20-cv-00504-ADA-JCM Document 55 Filed 03/31/21 Page 1 of 2
After that thorough review, the Court is persuaded that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and 

recommendation should be adopted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United 

States Magistrate Judge Manske, ECF No. 49, is ADOPTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s objections are OVERRULED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) is 

GRANTED and Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 28) is DISMISSED WITH 

PREJUDICE in accordance with the Report and Recommendation. 

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Interim Class 

Counsel (ECF No. 27) is DENIED. 

SIGNED this 31st day of March, 2021.

ALAN D ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00504-ADA-JCM Document 55 Filed 03/31/21 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STAYES EN\flRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

RGGNIX

Th Hawthorna Straet

San Francisco, CA 041054901

NOV 21 2U12

Mr. James N. Goldstene

Executive Officer

California Air Resources Board

Post Office Box 2815

Sacramento, Comia 95812

/1 A/

Dear’i1c1stene

On Nvember 7, 2012, the Ci1itornta Air Resources Board submitted revisions to the California State

1mplientatton Plan We have revieed iriatenals submitted with the following rules and lound that

the) lullill the compktenes criteria in 40 Code at Federal Regulations Part $1, Appendix V

APCD/AQMJ) Rule# Rule Title

Impenul Couxny 800 General Requirements for Control of Fine

Particulate Matter (PM-to)

Imperial County 1804 Open Areas --

Imperial County 805 Paved and Unpvcd Road

Imperkt County 806 Conservaticn Management Practice5

This addresses all revisions in this submittal, In the coming months we will reviev the complete

reisious for action pursuant to Clean Air Act section 1 10(k).

Questions regarding our completeness review should be directed to Cynthia G Allen at (415) 947-4120.

Sincerely,

iihi borah Jordan/

Director, Air Diision

cc: Mr. Brad Poiriez, APCO

Imperial Ciunty APCD

Mr. Michael Guzzetta Manager

Rule Evaluation Section

Stationary Source Division

1
EPA Region 9 SIP COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST

To evaluate compliance with 40 CFR 51, Appendix V

Submittal Date November 7, 2012

District Name Imperial County APCD

Date Reviewed November 18, 2012

EPA Reviewer C.G. Allen

Key:

C

NIA

0

= Complete

= Incomplete

= Not Applicable To Rule

= Material Missing

L 800 804 805 806

ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS (per Appendix V, Section 2.1)

(a) Submittal letter from Governor/designee X X X X

(b) Evidence of adoption X X X X

(c) State/District legal authority to adopt X X X X

(dl) Copyof actual rule/plan X X X X

(d2) Rule changes indicated by underline/cross-out X X X X

(e) Proof that action met procedural requirements X X X X

(f) Copy of public notice X X X X

(g) Certification that hearing fulfilled public notice X X X X

(h) Public comments & agency response X X X X

TECHNICAL SUPPORT (per Appendix V, Section 2.2)

(a) Regulated pollutants identified X X X X

(b) Affected sources & attainment status identified X X X X

(c) Rule/plan emissions impact X X X X

(d) Attainment, PSD & other required demonstration N/A N/A N/A N/A

(e) Modeling support as appropriate N/A N/A N/A N/A

(f) Reliance on continuous emission reductions X X X X

(g) Evidence of limits & other needed requirements X X X X

(i) Justification for deviation from EPA policy N/A N/A N/A N/A

J OVERALL COMPLETENESS C C C C

Notes:
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-50203

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CLAUDIO ENRIQUEZ-VILLA,

also known as Claudio Enriquez,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-00-CR-952-ALL-H

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

August 23, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Claudio Enriquez-Villa appeals the 46-month term of

imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction of

being found in the United States after removal in violation of 8

U.S.C. § 1326. Enriquez-Villa argues that his sentence should

not have exceeded the two-year maximum term of imprisonment

prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Enriquez-Villa acknowledges

that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision

in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but
No. 01-50203 

-2-

seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of

the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). EnriquezVilla’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

 AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
Ernie Fletcher 

Governor 

Teresa J. Hill'- 

, Gecretary 

- I I I i I .- I Commonwealth of Kentucky 

Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet 

Office of the Secretary - 

Capital Plaza Tower 

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 

Mr. James I. Palmer, Jr. 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. EPA, Region 4 

Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 

61 Forsyth Street, SW 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 

Dear Mr. Palmer: 

The Kentucky Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet (EPPC) hereby submits to the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) a letter certifying that Kentucky's existing State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) contains Section 1 10 provisions that address the requirements for the 8-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) as specified in the October 2,2007, "Guidance 

on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110 (a)(l) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM,, 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards." - - 

If you have any questions or comments concerning this matter, please contact Lona Brewer at 

the Division for Air Quality at (502) 573-3382. 

I 1 " 

- % Sincerely, 

TJH:jeg 

cc: John Lyons 

Kay Prince 

Printed on Recycled ~a~plu f - I 

An Equal Opportunity Employer MIFI - r. 1 

, !, - . I -- l ! 

i.1 .. r 1 

'I ?I