alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed October 4, 2016 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00556-CV

NO. 14-16-00578-CV

____________

IN THE INTEREST OF A.L.H., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 313th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2014-00466J

ORDER

These are accelerated appeals from a judgment in a suit in which the 

termination of the parent-child relationship is at issue. 

The appellant in appeal number 14-16-00556-CV, M.M., is represented by 

retained counsel. Counsel filed and was granted a motion for extension until October 

13, 2016, to file M.M.’s brief. 

The appellant in appeal number 14-16-00578-CV, L.M., is represented by 

appointed counsel. L.M.’s brief was due October 3, 2016, but neither the brief nor a 

motion for extension of time to file the brief has been filed. 
2

Appeals in parental termination cases and child protection cases are to be 

brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed. 

See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2(a) (effective May 1, 2012). This accelerated schedule 

requires greater compliance with briefing deadlines. 

Therefore we order appellant L.M.’s appointed counsel, Sarah Guidry, to file 

L.M.’s brief no later than October 13, 2016. If the brief is not filed by that date, 

counsel may be required to show cause why she should not be held in contempt of 

court. In addition, the court may require appointment of new counsel due to the 

failure to timely file appellant’s brief.

If they desire, M.M. and L.M. may file a joint brief that complies with Rule 

9.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

PER CURIAM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0262

_________________

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF:

CARLA CRUZ,

 Petitioner and Appellee,

 and

CARLOS A. CRUZ HERNANDEZ,

 Respondent and Appellant.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the 

Honorable Leslie Halligan, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 8 2023

11/08/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0262
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

DATA COMPLETENESS REPORT Sep. 12, 2012 Report Request ID: 1018558 Report Code: AMP430

Selection Criteria Page 1 User ID:KHO

State County City

Site Parameter POC AQCR UAR CBSA CSA EPA Region Method Duration Begin Date End Date 06 06 101

115 GEOGRAPHIC SELECTIONS

PROTOCOL SELECTIONS Parameter Classification Parameter Method Duration CRITERIA 88101

SELECTED OPTIONS

OZONE EVALUATION AGENCY ROLE MERGE PDF FILES Option Type Option Value SEASONAL-HOURLY REPORTING YES SORT ORDER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Order Column

EPA_REGION STATE_CODE MONITOR_TYPE COUNTY_CODE SITE_ID PARAMETER_CODE POC GLOBAL DATES

2009 Start Date End Date 2009 01 12 Tribal CodeSep. 12, 2012 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM DATA COMPLETENESS REPORT



### Page 1 of 3 MONITORS NOT REPORTINGSep. 12, 2012 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM DATA COMPLETENESS REPORT



### Page 2 of 3 DATE RANGE: REGION:(09) SAN FRANCISCO

California MONITOR TYPE: California Air Resources Board SLAMS JAN. 01, 2009 DEC. 31, 2009

THRU

SITE ID CITY ADDRESS PARAMETER POCDURATION METHOD ------------------------------- OBSERVATIONS ------------------------------- NUMBER / PERCENT
06-101-0003 88101PM2.5 - Local Conditions 1 7 Yuba City 773 ALMOND ST, YUBA CITY 118 31 100% 22

79% 30 97% 30 100% 31 100% 29

97% 31 100% 23

74% 30 100% 31

100% 30 100% 28

90% 346

95% MONITORS REPORTING

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR STATE: REP ORG:Sep. 12, 2012 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM DATA COMPLETENESS REPORT



### Page 3 of 3 DATE RANGE: REGION:(09) SAN FRANCISCO

California

MONITOR TYPE:

California Air Resources Board SLAMS JAN. 01, 2009 DEC. 31, 2009

THRU

PARAMETER ACTIVE MONITORS # NOT REPORTING # MONITORS > 75% MONITORS AVG COMPLETENESS 88101 PM2.5 - Local Conditions 1 0 1 95.0% 1 0 1 95.0% 1 0 1 95.0% 1 0 1 95.0% 1 0 1 95.0% 1 0 1 95.0% California Air Resources Board California REGION SUMMARY:(09) SAN FRANCISCO REPORT SUMMARY: MT SUMMARY:SLAMS REPORT SUMMARY

STATE:

STATE SUMMARY: REP ORG:

RO SUMMARY:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Pathmark
Stores, Inc. Consolidated Statement of Operations for the 26 weeks ended July
31, 1999 and Consolidated Balance Sheet as of July 31, 1999 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                               8,307
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       13,888
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (1,109)
<INVENTORY>                                        147,340
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   260,275
<PP&E>                                             877,259
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (399,033)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     839,376
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              352,539
<BONDS>                                          1,286,217
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                      (1,147,197)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       839,376
<SALES>                                          1,817,185
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,817,185
<CGS>                                            1,297,311
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,297,311
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      (168)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (79,901)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (15,332)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           (18)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (15,350)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (15,350)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1446

T. JAMES ANDERSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY; ROBERT VAN SCHAIK; UNION BAPTIST CHURCH, INCORPORATED; ELIZABETH WATSON, Adjuster, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-00- 3442-AMD) Submitted: May 31, 2001 Decided: June 8, 2001 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. T. James Anderson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Charles Elliott Wilson, Jr., MCCARTHY, WILSON & ETHRIDGE, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: T. James Anderson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his civil rights action. 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 Anderson v. Erie Insurance Co. , No. CA-00- 3442-AMD (D. Md. Feb. 28, 2001). 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000095676
<NAME>                        Meridian Medical Technologies, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   APR-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                                 390
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        9,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                          (356)
<INVENTORY>                                          6,998
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    18,996
<PP&E>                                              20,948
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (5,081)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      46,826
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               14,667
<BONDS>                                             17,772
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               299
<OTHER-SE>                                          11,456
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        46,826
<SALES>                                              9,620
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     9,620
<CGS>                                               (7,937)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       (7,937)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (2,309)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    (812)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (1,331)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (1,331)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (1,331)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        (0.44)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.44)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2927 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2927

To prevent the implementation of certain tax and fee provisions of the 
 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act until the Secretary of the 
  Treasury certifies that reporting requirements relating to employer 
 status and employee income levels and health care status may be made 
              with 100 percent accuracy and without fraud.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 1, 2013

Mr. Bilirakis introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy 
    and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prevent the implementation of certain tax and fee provisions of the 
 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act until the Secretary of the 
  Treasury certifies that reporting requirements relating to employer 
 status and employee income levels and health care status may be made 
              with 100 percent accuracy and without fraud.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No Taxation Without Verification Act 
of 2013''.

SEC. 2. CERTIFICATION THAT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO EMPLOYER 
              STATUS AND EMPLOYEE INCOME LEVELS AND HEALTH CARE STATUS 
              MAY BE MADE WITH 100 PERCENT ACCURACY AND WITHOUT FRAUD.

    No tax or fee imposed by, and no reduction in a deduction, 
exclusion or other tax benefit made by, the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act (including any amendments therein) shall be 
implemented for any period before the Secretary of the Treasury, or the 
Secretary's designee, certifies that the reporting requirements 
relating to employer status and employee income levels and health care 
status may be made with 100 percent accuracy and without fraud.
                                 <all>
```
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 2 2

- 330 C (Filed: August 23

, 202 2 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

***************************************

ARTHUR LOPEZ

, *

*

Plaintif f

, *

*

v. *

* THE UNITED STATES, *

*

Defendant. *

*

***************************************

OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Arthur Lopez

— proceeding pro se

— seeks monetary relief on claims

arising from loss of his house

. See Compl. at 4 (ECF 1). The government has moved

to dismiss

. See Def. ’s Mot. to Dismiss (ECF 14 ); Pl.’s Resp. (ECF 17 ); Def.’s Reply

(ECF 20 ). The motion is GRANTED , and the case is DISMISSED

. Plaintiff alleges that the loss of his house involved a taking of property without

the just compensation required by the Fifth Amend ment

. This Court has jurisdiction

over takings claims. But Plaintiff must plead facts that

— if taken as true

— would

plausibly “e stablish that [a] government action caused the injury .” St. Bernard Par.

Gov ’ t v. United States , 887 F.3d 1354, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2018) ; Adams v. United States

, 391 F.3d 1212, 1218 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ; see generally Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662,

6 78 (2009) . Plaintiff provides no such facts.

At most, he pleads that a former federal official was on the board of a bank

that deprived him of his property. Assuming that is true

— and making allowances

for Plaintiff’s pro se status, see Scott v. United States , 134 Fed. Cl. 755, 758 (2017)

— it does not support a reasonable inference that the government itself took any action.

Iqb al , 556 U.S. at 678. The United States, moreover, is “t he only proper defendant for

any matter before this [C] ourt ,” see Stephenson v. United States , 58 Fed. Cl. 186, 190

(2003) (citing United States v. Sherwood , 312 U.S. 584, 588 (1941)), so Plaintiff cannot

proceed in this case against either the bank or the former federal official.

In his response to the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff refers to an alleged

conspiracy between the United States and the bank. Pl.’s Resp. at 5. Even forgiving- 2

-

Plaintiff ’s failure to present those theories in his Complaint, “ the allegations are

conclusory and not entitled to be assumed true .” Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 6 81

. Another problem with the Complaint is that “[a] takings claim m ust be

premised on otherwise lawful government action. ” Scott , 134 Fed. Cl. at 764 . Plaintiff

argues that his property was taken illegally. Pl.’s Resp. at 5

– 6. That precludes

Plaintiff from purs u ing a takings theory as well

.

C ONCLUSION

For the foregoing r easons , Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED

. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED

. s/ Stephen S. Schwartz

STEPHEN S. SCHWARTZ Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   MAY-29-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        FEB-27-1999
<CASH>                                   36,012
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                           272,740 <F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                             261,689
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        689,269
<PP&E>                                  841,453
<DEPRECIATION>                          408,559
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        1,322,903
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   485,444
<BONDS>                                 150,870
<COMMON>                                139,924
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                              464,140 <F2>
 <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         1,322,903
<SALES>                               1,321,751
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      1,321,751
<CGS>                                   822,177
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           822,177
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       (111,811)
<INCOME-TAX>                           (35,779)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    (76,032)
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                           (76,032)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            (1.59)
<EPS-DILUTED>                            (1.59)
<FN>
<F1> Amount represents net accounts receivable.
<F2> Amount includes retained earnings and other comprehensive income.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 199 (Friday, October 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60982-60983]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26320]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Advisory Panel for Methods, Cross-Directorate, and Science and 
Society Programs; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the 
following meetings of the COV Advisory Panel for Infrastructure, 
Methods & Science Studies (#1760):

    Date and Time: November 13-14, 2000.
    Rooms: 309/209 Maingate Building-Tucson, Arizona.
    Place: University of Arizona.
    Contact Person: Dr. Rachelle Hollander, Program Director for 
SDEST, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, 
Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-8763.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate SDEST proposals as part of the 
selection process for awards.

    Date & Time: October 27-28, 2000.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd, Room 310, 
Arlington, VA.
    Contact Person: Dr. Bruce Seely, Program Director for Science & 
Technology Studies,

[[Page 60983]]

National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 
22230. Telephone: (703) 292-8763.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate STS proposals as part of the 
selection process for awards.

    Date & Time: December 1, 2000.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd, Room 370, 
Arlington, VA.
    Contact Person: Dr. Cheryl L. Eavey, Program Director for 
Methods, Measurement & Statistics, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-8763.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate MMS proposals as part of the 
selection process for awards.

    Types of Meetings: Closed.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning support for research proposals submitted to the NSF for 
financial support.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: October 10, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-26320 Filed 10-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
----

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

| 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | Dated: | March 15, 2011                              |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                        |
|   | By:    | /s/ Travis Beatty                           |
|   | Name:  | Travis Beatty                               |
|   | Title: | Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial |
|   |   | Officer (Principal Financial Officer)       |

----
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed April 14, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-690

Lower Tribunal No. F11-19910

________________

Anthony Chavis,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from 

the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ellen Sue Venzer, Judge.

Anthony Chavis, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, SCALES, and LOBREE, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.