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

SIP Completeness Checklist 1 

### MONTEREY BAY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

SIP COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST

RULE NUMBER: 902 DATE AMENDED: 4/20/05

REGULATION TITLE: District ’ s Request for Information

ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS

Attached/Not Attached*

X COMPLETE COPY OF THE RULE. If amended rule, indicate changes in underline and strikeout format, compared to existing approved SIP version.

X REFERENCE TO OTHER RULES. If the rule contains a reference

to any other rule, attach a copy of that other rule unless it has already been submitted to EPA as a part of a previous SIP submittal.

X PUBLIC NOTICE EVIDENCE. Include a copy of the newspaper clipping certification with date of publication. Include a copy of notice from each newspaper.

X RESOLUTION/MINUTE ORDER. Must include Board Clerk certification that hearing was held in accordance with information in the public notice; must also include list of rules adopted or amended, dat e of public hearing, and statement of compliance with H&SC Sections 40725-40728 [Administrative Procedures Act].

X PUB LIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES: Any written comments submitted to the District during pubic notice period or at the hearing; also include any written responses prepared by the District as normal District procedure.MBUAPCD

SIP Completeness Checklist 2 OTHER INFORMATION

Attached/Not Attached

X MODELING SUPPORT. Provide as appropriate; not required for

VOC and NOx rules; required where rule is a relaxation in an attainment

area for SO2, PM10, CO, or NOx [for NO2 purposes]; for relaxation or shift of emissions in nonattainment area for SO2, PM10, CO, and NOx, give reference to the approved SIP.

X ECONOMIC/TECHNICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR DE VIATIONS

FROM EPA POLICIES: As appropriate, describe special circumstances, i.e., where alternative RACT is used, extended compliance dates included, etc.**

X ADDITIONAL MATERIALS: Any other supporting information, such as staff reports , which are included with the rule package but not specifically required in the checklist above.

------------- * Attached separate sheet for each rule explaining why any materials are not included and when they will be submitted to the ARB.

** Completed enforcement checklist will fulfill this requirement.
#### Joe EDWARDS v. STATE.

No. 24367.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 4, 1949.

None on appeal for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The judgment in this case is void for the same reason as that shown in the opinion in Cause No. 24364 against the appellant, 219 S.W.2d 1022.

For the reason there expressed, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.
<PAGE> 1                                                EXHIBIT 11.

                                MUSTANG SOFTWARE, INC.
                          COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                (In thousands, except earnings per share) (Unaudited)
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        Three Months Ended  Nine Months Ended
                                                           Sept. 30,                 Sept. 30, 
                                                                1995       1996     1995       1996
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                          <C>       <C>      <C>        <C>
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding          3,356    3,363    2,939      3,361 
Common stock equivlents from outstanding stock options           34        0       26          0
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average common and common stock equivalents outstanding       3,390    3,363    2,965      3,361
==================================================================================================
Net Income                                                  $   419  $(1,118)  $  313    $(2,417)          
==================================================================================================
Earnings per share (1)                                      $   .12  $  (.33)  $  .11    $  (.72) 
==================================================================================================
</TABLE>

(1) Fully diluted earnings per share have not been presented because the effects
are not material.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Con. Res. 222 Agreed to June 21, 1994

One Hundred Third Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four

Concurrent Resolution

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concur- ring), That the Joint Committee on the Library is authorized to

accept a bust of Raoul Wallenberg and to place the bust in an

appropriate location in the Capitol, as determined by the Joint

Committee on the Library.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6397-6398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2869]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

Notice [00-017]


Agency Information Collection: Submission for OMB Review, Comment 
Request

AGENCY:  National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION:  Notice of Agency Report Forms Under OMB Review.

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

SUMMARY:  The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) the following 
proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

DATES:  Comments on this proposal should be received on or before March 
10, 2000.

ADDRESSES:  All comments should be addressed to Mr. Karl Beisel, 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ms. Carmela Simonson, Office of the 
Chief Information Officer, (202) 358-1223.
    Reports: None.
    Title: Security Requirements for Unclassified Information 
Technology.
    OMB Number: 2700-Type of Review: New.
    Need and Uses: NASA must safeguard its unclassified Information 
Technology hardware, software and data. Respondents will be NASA 
contractors and subcontractors involved in IT.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 200.
    Responses Per Respondent: 2.
    Estimated Annual Responses: 400.

[[Page 6398]]

    Estimated Hours Per Request: 470 hrs.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 188,000.
    Frequency of Report: Semi-annually.

David B. Nelson,
Deputy Chief Information Officer, Office of the Administrator.
[FR Doc. 00-2869 Filed 2-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 199 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 199

  Expressing the sense of the Congress that a postage stamp should be 
issued to honor the 100th anniversary of the Jewish War Veterans of the 
                       United States of America.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 25, 1994

  Mr. Talent submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the Congress that a postage stamp should be 
issued to honor the 100th anniversary of the Jewish War Veterans of the 
                       United States of America.

Whereas the Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America, an organization 
        of patriotic Americans dedicated to highlighting the role of Jews in the 
        United States Armed Forces, will celebrate 100 years of patriotic 
        service to the Nation on March 15, 1996;
Whereas thousands of Jews have proudly served the Nation in times of war;
Whereas thousands of Jews have died in combat while serving in the United States 
        Armed Forces;
Whereas, in World War II alone, Jews received more than 52,000 awards for 
        outstanding service in the United States Armed Forces, including the 
        Medal of Honor, the Air Medal, the Silver Star, and the Purple Heart;
Whereas, in World War II alone, over 11,000 Jews died in combat while serving in 
        the United States Armed Forces;
Whereas members of the Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America have 
        volunteered over 10,000,000 hours at veterans' hospitals; and
Whereas honoring the sacrifices of Jewish veterans is an important component of 
        recognizing the strong and patriotic role Jews have played in the United 
        States Armed Forces: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that--
            (1) a postage stamp should be issued to honor the 100th 
        anniversary of the Jewish War Veterans of the United States of 
        America; and
            (2) the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee of the United 
        States Postal Service should recommend to the Postmaster 
        General that such a postage stamp be issued.

                                 <all>
```
ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE



Reference
is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2015, by and among WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE
SECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC, as Special
Servicer, PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Trust Advisor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,as
Certificate Administrator, as Tax Administrator and as Custodianand WILMINGTON
TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-NXS2 (the "Agreement").
Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.



Pursuant to Section 11.12 of this Agreement,
I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through
December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made
under my supervision, and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilled all of its
obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has
executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.





Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President
Wells Fargo Bank

























Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 189

Expressing the sense of the Congress that every appropriate effort should

be made to avert a humanitarian disaster in Bosnia-Herzegovina and

the other former Yugoslav republics during the winter of 1993–1994.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 22, 1993

Mr. MCCLOSKEY (for himself, Mr. WILSON, Mr. HYDE, and Ms. MOLINARI)

submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Foreign Affairs

NOVEMBER 23 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 22), 1993

Committee on Foreign Affairs discharged; considered and agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that every appropriate

effort should be made to avert a humanitarian disaster

in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the other former Yugoslav

republics during the winter of 1993–1994.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that—

3 (1) the United States, together with the inter4 national community, should make every appropriate

5 effort to ensure that the people of Bosnia6 Herzegovina have adequate medical supplies, food,
2

•HCON 189 ATH

1 and other humanitarian assistance during the winter

2 of 1993–1994 in order to prevent a possible humani3 tarian disaster;

4 (2) the United States should support necessary

5 and appropriate preparations to facilitate a relief ef6 fort in order to prevent a possible humanitarian dis7 aster;

8 (3) all parties should cooperate with the provi9 sion of humanitarian assistance to those in need

10 throughout the former Yugoslav republics, especially

11 Bosnia-Herzegovina;

12 (4) the United States should provide similar as13 sistance to the peoples endangered this winter

14 throughout the former Yugoslav republics, especially

15 the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; and

16 (5) the United States should expend appro17 priated funds for such purposes as expeditiously as

18 possible.

Æ
#### O’REAR v. STATE.

No. 22327.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 9, 1942.

*706W. E. Martin, of Abilene, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was charged with a violation of the local option liquor laws of Taylor County. The information and complaint also contained an allegation of repeated prior offenses, and upon a conviction he was fined the sum of $540.

The statement of facts shows a confession in open court of appellant to the charged offense, as well as the prior offenses. It is also shown therein that Taylor County was a dry area. There are no bills of exceptions in the record.

All proceedings appearing to be regular, and nothing being presented for review, the judgment is affirmed.
May 22, 2018



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ALEX VILLALOBOS , Appellant

NO. 14

- 16

- 00593

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________ ________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
|                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                   
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                     
|View History: Annual                                               
|View History: Annual                                               
|View History:                                                      
|                                                                   
|U.S. Number of Idle Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                   
|                                                                   
|U.S. Number of Idle Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                   

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 47     | 25     | 33     | 24     | 24     | 24     | 18     | 11    
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 11     | 18     | 16     | 12     | 8      | 10     | NA     | 5      | NA     | 4     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 5      | 9      | 4      | 3      | 4      | 7      | 4      | 4      | 9     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 11     | 11     | 10     | 4      | 3      | 3      | 2      | 4      | 0      | 3     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 4      | 5      | 5      | 5      | 0      |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

v. CASE NO. 5:22-CR-038-H-BQ-1 

UBALDO SALAZAR BARRIENTOS 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PLEA 

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

This case has been referred by the United States district judge to the undersigned 

for the taking of a guilty plea. The parties have consented to appear before a United States 

magistrate judge for these purposes. This Report and Recommendation on Plea is submitted 

to the court under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). 

The defendant appeared with counsel before the undersigned United States 

magistrate judge, who addressed the defendant personally in open court and informed the 

defendant of, and determined that the defendant understood, the admonitions contained in 

Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. 

The defendant pleaded guilty (under a written plea bargain agreement with the 

government) to Count Two of the Indictment, charging defendant with a violation of 

18 US. C. § 1708, that is, Possession of Stolen Mail. After examining Defendant under oath 

the undersigned magistrate judge finds the following: 

1. Defendant, upon advice of counsel, has consented orally and in writing 

to enter this guilty plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final 

approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge; 

2. Defendant fully understands the nature of the charges (including each 

essential element of the offense(s) charged) and penalties; 

Case 5:22-cr-00038-H-BQ Document 25 Filed 08/22/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 95
3. Defendant fully understands the terms of the plea agreement and plea 

agreement supplement; 

4. Defendant understands all constitutional and statutory rights and wishes 

to waive these rights, including the right to a trial by jury and the right 

to appear before a United States district judge; 

5. Defendant's plea is made freely and voluntarily; 

6. Defendant is competent to enter this plea of guilty; 

7. There is a factual basis for this plea; and 

8. The ends of justice are served by acceptance of the defendant's plea of 

guilty. 

Although I have conducted these proceedings and recommend acceptance of 

Defendant's plea of guilty, the United States district judge has the power to review my 

actions and possesses final decision-making authority in this proceeding. Thus, if 

Defendant has any objections to these findings or any other action of the undersigned, he 

is required to make those known to the United States district judge within fourteen (14) 

days of today. 

Based on the above, I recommend that Defendant's plea of guilty be accepted, that 

Defendant be adjudged guilty, and that sentence be imposed accordingly. 

Signed August 22, 2022. 

Case 5:22-cr-00038-H-BQ Document 25 Filed 08/22/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 96
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR ParI 39

[4910-13..1'1

"ru~~"NCES

O\fW'GSYMOO~

(DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation

5.(

{Docket No. FAA-2010-0J7]; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-185-AD; Amendme msGSYlo

1~32-q fQ- ,k)I}H/1

39-*****' AD 2010-**-**1 t>oTIlALSlSK;

, D.-De> !U~

RlN 2120 AA64 "'c. t,(I"

- ~

ItOVTlNG SY'"""'l

Ainvorthiness Directives; Airbus Model AJOO Series Airplanes; Airbus Model ..t\300 fr;JJJ.1.._ ib/

B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model C4-60SR Variant F airplan'~7~

,,

(Collectively Called A300-600 series airplanes); and Model A310 Series Airplanes •.c::1n"l."i. 0

~

£

~<OUTING SYM2

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products list{m'AL5''SIG

above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MeAl) 'ATE

originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe

condition on an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafe condition as:

During a maintenance check performed by an A31 0 operator, the

recommended modification of the lower attachment beam of rack

101VU by accomplishment of Airbus Service Bulletin (SB)

A31O-S3-2076 was embodied on the aeroplane, leading the

operator to fmd three cracks on the FR1SA crossbeam above the

NLG [nose landing gear] box at the splicing with rack l07VU

fitting.

This condition, if not detected and corrected, could degrade the

structural integrity of the crossbeam on NLG FR15A web

attachment fitting ofrack 107VU. Rack 107VU contains major

tOU'IING ,VMOO['

N<TLAl.SISl<;

>ATE

;(lUTING SYMBOL

~11'IAl.SISIG

'ATE
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA , Respondent ,

v.

MICHAEL COLE ROPER , Petitioner

.
No. 1 CA

- CR 21

- 0 4 8 3 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2 00 9

- 006254

- 003 The Honorable Laura M. Reckart , Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney ’ s Office , Phoenix By Amanda M. Parker Counsel for Respondent
Michael Cole Roper , Tucson Petitioner FILED 2-15-2022STATE v. ROPER Decision of the Court

2 MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz , Judge Samuel A. Thumma, and Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM :
¶1 Petitioner Michael Cole Roper seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post

- conviction relief

. This is petitioner’s eighth successive petition.
¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post

- conviction relief. State v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition for post

- conviction relief. See State v. Poblete , 227 Ariz. 537, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing a buse of discretion on review).
¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court’s order denying the petition for post

- conviction relief, and the petition for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We gran t review and deny relief.