alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History:                                                                         
|                                                                                      
|West Coast (PADD 5) Refinery Shell Storage Capacity as of January 1 (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                      
|                                                                                      
|West Coast (PADD 5) Refinery Shell Storage Capacity as of January 1 (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                      

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2  | Year-3  | Year-4  | Year-5  | Year-6  | Year-7  | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | -------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |         |         | 148,258 | 165,000 | 160,714 | 159,542 | 164,166 | 159,875 | 170,787 | 167,624
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 171,213 | 173,760 | 165,687 | 170,767 | 166,593 | 160,280 | NA      | 161,218 | NA      | 151,129
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 150,393 | 153,760 | 159,769 | 157,188 | 155,364 | 149,653 | 151,466 | 153,643 | 152,308 | 150,479
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 149,865 | --      | --      | --      | --      | --      | --      | --      | --      | --     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --      | --      | --      | --      | --      |         |         |         |         |        
|- = 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
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 219 (Monday, November 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 67719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28865]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Partnership Council Meeting

AGENCY: Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting Cancellation.

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

SUMMARY:  On October 12, 2000, 65 FR 60652, the Department of Defense 
published a notice to announce a meeting of the Defense Partnership 
Council to be held November 9, 2000. This notice is to announce that 
the meeting is cancelled due to conflicts in members' schedules.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ben James, Chief, Labor and 
Employee Relations Branch, Field Advisory Services Division, Defense 
Civilian Personnel Management Service, 1400 Key Boulevard, Suite B-200, 
Arlington, VA 22209-5144, (703) 696-1450.

    Dated: November 6, 2000.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD.
[FR Doc. 00-28865 Filed 11-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-10-M
|                                                                                                                             
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                             
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                               
|View History: Annual                                                                                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                                                         
|View History:                                                                                                                
|                                                                                                                             
|U.S. Refinery Distillate Fuel Oil Greater than 15 to 500 ppm Sulfur Shell Storage Capacity as of January 1 (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                                                             
|                                                                                                                             
|U.S. Refinery Distillate Fuel Oil Greater than 15 to 500 ppm Sulfur Shell Storage Capacity as of January 1 (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                                                             

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        | 39,023 | 45,536 | 43,224 | 16,310 | 13,386 | 12,638
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 9,563  | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
#### JESSE v. STATE.

No. 22442.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 24, 1943.

Stanford & Lewis, of Navasota, for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction is for theft of a hog, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.

No statement of facts or bills of exception are brought forward. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-2035

In Re: GARY LEWIS MILLER-EL, 

 Petitioner. 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

Submitted: November 16, 2009 Decided: December 7, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. 

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Gary Lewis Miller-El, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

 Gary Lewis Miller-El petitions for a writ of mandamus 

seeking an order compelling state officials to dismiss a pending 

indictment and release him from custody, and other remedies. We 

conclude that Miller-El is not entitled to mandamus relief. 

 Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used 

only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States 

Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. 

Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, 

mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a 

clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan 

Ass'n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). This court does not 

have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state 

officials. Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, 411 

F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969). 

 The relief sought by Miller-El is not available by way 

of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of 

mandamus. 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. 

PETITION DENIED
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 25, 2021

No. 04

- 21

- 00079

- CV

Sharon MARKEY, Appellant

v.

Nieva Mae MARKEY, et al,

Appellee

From the 381st Judicial District Court

, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC

- 20

- 292

Honorable Jose Luis Ga rza , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

To date, appellant Sharon Mark ey has failed to pay the applicable filing fee in this appeal. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 5 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.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5.

We, therefore, ORDER appellant, within ten (10) days from the date of this order, to either (1) pay the applicable filing fee in this appeal or (2) provide written proof to this court that

she is excused by statute or these rules from paying the filing fee. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1 ; se e also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c). If appellant fail s to respond within the time provided, this appeal

w ill be dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c).

_________________________________ Liz a A. Rodriguez , JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 25th day of March, 2021

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
Case 4:22-cr-00114-Y Document 1 Filed 03/08/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID 1
Case 4:22-cr-00114-Y Document 1 Filed 03/08/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID 2
Case 4:22-cr-00114-Y Document 1 Filed 03/08/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID 3
Case 4:22-cr-00114-Y Document 1 Filed 03/08/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID 4
DENY; and Opinion Filed September 9, 2019.

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 00912
- CV IN RE ALLSTATE PROPE RTY AND CASUALTY INS URANCE COMPANY , Relator

Original Proceeding from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 16
- 04652 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Nowell Opinion by Justice Molberg Before the Court is relator’s August 2, 2019 petitio n for writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s March 1, 2019 order requiring relator to pay a sanction of $1,000 to Regenerative Ortho Spine Institute of Texas (ROSIT), a non - party

. The March 1 order was based on relator ’s August 27, 2018 motion to c ompel and motion to show cause directed at ROSIT

. Rel a tor generally contends the trial court abused its discretion by (1) awarding s anctions based on the misconduct of a non

- party records service , and (2) utilizing an improper burden of proof which requir ed relator to show its motion to compel “ was meritorious and ‘ not self

- defeating on its face. ’ ” To be entitled to mandamus relief, relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator ha s no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co

. of Am

. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135

– 36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing the petition and the mandamus record, we conclude relator ha s not shown it is entitled to the relief requested.– 2

–

Accordi ngly, we deny relator’ s petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought).

190912F.P05 /Ken Molberg/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 117

Relating to improved United States-Mexico cooperation in controlling illegal

immigration.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 1, 1993

Mr. LEHMAN (for himself, Mr. STARK, Mr. WILSON, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mrs.

MORELLA, Mr. SARPALIUS, Ms. KAPTUR, and Mr. CANADY) submitted

the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Relating to improved United States-Mexico cooperation in

controlling illegal immigration.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress strongly urges the Presi3 dent to take such action as may be necessary to ensure

4 that the current North American free trade area negotia5 tions on labor matters adequately address the issue of im6 proved bilateral cooperation between Mexico and the

7 United States on controlling illegal immigration.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 218 (Thursday, November 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 67372]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28764]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than December 4, 2000.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Phillip Jackson, Applications 
Officer) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Lenawee Bancorp, Inc., Adrian, Michigan; to acquire 100 percent 
of the voting shares of Bank of Washtenaw (In organization), Saline, 
Michigan.
    2. Chemical Financial Corporation, Midland, Michigan; to merge with 
Shoreline Financial Corporation, Benton Harbor, Michigan, and thereby 
indirectly acquire Shoreline Bank, Benton Harbor, Michigan.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 3, 
2000.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 00-28764 Filed 11-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
III

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 299

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 7 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the printing of the book entitled ‘‘Hispanic

Americans in Congress’’.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the book entitled ‘‘Hispanic Americans

3 in Congress’’, prepared under the direction of the Joint

4 Committee on Printing, shall be printed as a House docu5 ment, with illustrations and suitable binding.

6 SEC. 2. In addition to the usual number, there shall

7 be printed, for the use of the Joint Committee on Printing,

8 the lesser of—

9 (1) 25,000 copies of the document; or
2

HCON 299 RDS

1 (2) such number of copies of the document as

2 does not exceed a total production and printing cost

3 of $110,000.

Passed the House of Representatives October 7 (legislative day, October 6), 1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
* 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. 00-10986 

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RICARDO ABARCA-VENEGAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:00-CR-22-1-C

- - - - - - - - - -

December 14, 2000

Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Ricardo Abarca-Venegas (Abarca) appeals his conviction and

96-month sentence following his plea of guilty to illegal

re-entry into the United States after deportation in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1326. Abarca argues that the felony conviction that

resulted in his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2)

was an element of the offense that should have been charged in

the indictment. He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed

by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but

he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light
No. 00-10986

-2-

of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). Apprendi did

not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi, 120 S. Ct. at

2361-62 & n.15. Abarca’s argument is foreclosed. See

Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at 235. Accordingly, Abarca’s

conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
|                                                                                                                  
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                  
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                                              
|View History:                                                                                                     
|                                                                                                                  
|U.S. Refinery Catalytic Hydrocracking, Gas Oil Downstream Charge Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Stream Day)
|                                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                                  
|U.S. Refinery Catalytic Hydrocracking, Gas Oil Downstream Charge Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Stream Day)
|                                                                                                                  

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0    | Year-1    | Year-2    | Year-3    | Year-4    | Year-5    | Year-6    | Year-7    | Year-8    | Year-9   
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------- | --------- | --------- | --------- | --------- | --------- | --------- | --------- | --------- | ---------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |           |           |           |           | 864,400   | 904,700   | 920,200   | 987,482   | 1,004,425 | 1,010,200
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1,079,500 | 1,170,500 | 1,161,100 | 1,337,400 | 1,400,100 | 1,491,400 | 1,503,200 | 1,609,300 | 1,615,660 | 1,618,000
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1,630,300 | 1,595,800 | 1,599,700 | 1,561,100 | 1,566,600 |           |           |           |           |          
|- = 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