alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                           
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                             
|View History: Annual                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                       
|View History:                                                              
|                                                                           
|Maryland Number of Operable Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|Maryland Number of Operable 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                                                                                                                            |        |        | 2      | 1      | 1      | 1      | 1      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | NA     | 0      | NA     | 0     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 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
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**FREEDOM MEDICAL SUPPLY, INC.,**
**INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF**
**ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED**

**v.**

**STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY; STATE FARM MUTUAL** 
**AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY**

**PETITION OF: UNITED STATES**
**COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD**
**CIRCUIT :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 6 EM 2015** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 9th day of March, 2015, the Petition for Certi fication of Law** 

**submitted by the United States Court of Appeals for th e Third Circuit is**  GRANTED

**.**
**This Court shall consider the following issue:**

**May an insurer use methods not specifically identified in Pennsylvania’s**  **Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa.C.S. §§1701**  et seq. **, to calculate the “usual and customary” charge for devices and**  **services not listed on the Medicare Fee Schedule for purposes of det**  **ermining the amount to be paid to providers of those devices and se**  **rvices?**

**The Prothonotary is** DIRECTED **to establish a briefing schedule and list this**

**matter for oral argument.**
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OFCRIMINAL APPEALS OFTEXAS

p QEBSPIi.MSff'SWeSOTATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

STATE O'P^iS&ftg^g*... PENALTffiKtf*1- ^vf« . 1/5/2015 PRIVATE USE i ; |1

12T2^Wi

On this day, the application for 1f*07 Writ .of" Habeas O

and presented to the Court. " , "

k*

ROBERT CJ

02 1M

0004279r"

MAILED

I 2015

32,642-02

en received

i Acoi -\t

I

/•
EXHIBIT 15.1






                           May 5, 1997




Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

                             RE:  Foodbrands America, Inc.
                                  Registration on Form S-8


We are aware that our report dated May 5, 1997 on our review of
interim financial information of Foodbrands America, Inc. for the
periods ended March 29, 1997, and March 30, 1996, and included in
the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 29, 1997, is incorporated by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-04915, 333-04925, 333-
04665, 333-04671, 33-45974, 33-59331 and 33-62611) of Foodbrands
America, Inc.  Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act
of 1933, this report should not be considered a part of the
Registration Statement prepared or certified by us within the
meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.





                             COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         405,750
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    405,750
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 405,750
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           52,323
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        59,425
<OTHER-SE>                                     294,002
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   405,750
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,649
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10,649)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
#### JONES v. STATE.

No. 22921.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 25, 1944.

E. F. Fruechte, of Wichita Falls, and Rollie Fancher, of Seymour, for appellant.

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

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the county court of Baylor County of a violation of the liquor laws, and sentenced to pay a fine of $250, and an imprisonment in jail for a term of ninety days, hence this appeal.

It is necessary to consider only one point raised in this appeal, which will dispose of the case.

Appellant’s home was searched by enforcement officers by virtue of a search warrant issued upon an affidavit, and in said affidavit and warrant the place desired to be searched was referred to only as the “premises of A. D. Jones.” Nowhere therein is it set forth in such affidavit and warrant that appellant occupied, possessed, was in control of or had charge of such premises. We said in Miller v. State, 134 Tex.Cr.R. 118, 114 S.W.2d 244, 246, that:

“Many people own ‘premises’ on which there may be situated many residences, all of which may be occupied by people other than the owner, when he in fact lives — has his residence — at an entirely different place. It is true the officers testified that they knew the house searched was appellant’s residence, but such testimony would not supply the omission of such averment in the description of the property in the affidavit and warrant.” Also see 38 Tex. Jur. 56.

Again it was said in the case of Brown v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 61, 124 S.W.2d 124, 125:

“Also we find in the affidavit and warrant no recital that appellant either occupied, possessed, or had charge of the premises to be searched. One of such recitals was essential to the validity of the affidavit and warrant.”

The affidavit and warrant issued thereunder being thus defective, the search of the house was illegal. Any testimony based upon such illegal search was inadmissible herein, and its admission requires a reversal of the judgment.

The State’s Attorney also confesses error in this cause.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
EXHIBIT 7

GRUMA, S.A. DE C.V. AND SUBSIDIARIES  Computation of ratio of earnings to fixed charges  (Thousands of pesos of purchasing power as of December 31, 2005)

|                                          |                                       | Mexican GAAP
Year ended December 31, |         | US GAAP
Year ended December 31,
|----------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------ | ------- | -------------------------------
|
|Income before income tax and other items  |                                       | 806,668                              |         | 1,078,601                      
|Add:                                      |                                       |                                      |         |                                
|Interest expense                          |                                       | 722,901                              |         | 610,168                        
|One-third of operating rental expense     |                                       | 135,688                              |         | 131,623                        
|                                          |                                       |                                      |         |                                
|Earnings(b)                               |                                       | 1,665,257                            |         | 1,820,392                      
|Fixed charges                             |                                       |                                      |         |                                
|                                          | Interest expense                      |                                      | 722,901 |                                
|                                          | One-third of operating rental expense |                                      | 135,688 |                                
|                                          |                                       |                                      |         |                                
|Total Fixed charges(a)                    |                                       | 858,589                              |         | 741,791                        
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges(b)/(a) |                                       | 1.94                                 |         | 2.45                           
|                                          |                                       |                                      |         |                                

---



QuickLinks
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

LATANYA T ROZTER (1)

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

LATANYA T ROZIER (1), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. lggT),

has appeared before me pursuant to Fed. R. Crim.P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count(s) I of the Indictment

After cautioning and examining LATANYA T ROZIER (1) under oath conceming each of the subjects mentioned in Rule

I I, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense(s) charged is supported by an

independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore recommend that the plea of

guilty be accepted, and that LATANYA T ROZIER (l) be adjudged guilty of 18 U.S.C. $ 1709 Theft of Mail by Postal

Employee and have sentence imposed accordingly. After being found guilty of the offense by the district judge,

The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. $ 3la3(a)(l) unless the Court finds by clear and

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community

The Govemment does not oppose release.

The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under $ 3142(b) or (c).

The Govemment opposes release.

The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the

Government

The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to l8 U.S.C. $ 3la3(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or onal circumstances are clearly shown

under $ 3 la5(c) why the defeirdant should not be detained, and the finds by clear and convincing evidence

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any or the community if released.

Date: November 17,2022

AGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. $636(bXlXB).

$

$

$

$

$

n

K

n

n

!

!

NO\/ 1 1 )_022

Case 3:22-cr-00158-N Document 22 Filed 11/17/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 49
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 247 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 247

   Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to the Nagorno 
                           Karabagh conflict.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 11, 1994

 Mr. Bilbray (for himself, Mr. Lehman, Mr. Torres, Mr. Bonior, and Mr. 
    Hoyer) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to the Nagorno 
                           Karabagh conflict.

Whereas the Republic of Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabagh have been engaged in 
        armed conflict since 1988 over the disputed Armenian-majority enclave of 
        Nagorno Karabagh;
Whereas the Nagorno Karabagh conflict has resulted in more than 1,000,000 
        international refugees and the deaths of more than 15,000 people;
Whereas Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabagh, and Armenia have stated their desire to 
        reach a negotiated settlement to the Nagorno Karabagh dispute; and
Whereas the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe has put forth 
        several proposals to end the hostilities over Nagorno Karabagh and bring 
        a lasting and equitable peace to the region: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that--
            (1) both the Republic of Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabagh 
        should immediately cease all hostilities and begin peace 
        negotiations under the framework established by the Commission 
        on Security and Cooperation in Europe;
            (2) the parties to the conflict should, simultaneously, 
        lift all blockades in the region; and
            (3) the President should take an active role in promoting 
        peace and in monitoring the human rights situation in the 
        region.

                                 <all>
```
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.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP00-542-001]

Take notice that, on October 23, 2000, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheet, to be effective March 27, 2000.

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 160A

ANR states that this filing is made in compliance with the Commission's Order dated October 11, 2000 in the captioned proceeding.

ANR states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all affected customers and state regulatory commissions.

Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385,211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Beginning November 1, 2000, comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at http;//www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-28384  Filed 11-3-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 228 (Monday, November 27, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70647-70648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28959]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NE-11-AD; Amendment 39-11912; AD 2000-20-01]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca Arriel 1 Series Turboshaft 
Engines; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction

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

SUMMARY: This document makes a correction to Airworthiness Directive 
(AD) 2000-20-01 applicable to Turbomeca Arriel 1 series turboshaft 
engines that was published in the Federal Register on October 2, 2000 
(65 FR 58640). The listing of helicopters on which the affected engines 
might be installed in the table in the Applicability section is 
incorrect. This document corrects that listing. In all other respects, 
the original document remains the same.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 17, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Rosa, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone (781) 238-
7152, fax (781) 238-7199 .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A final rule airworthiness directive (FR Doc 
00-24900) applicable to Turbomeca Arriel 1 series turboshaft engines, 
was published in the Federal Register on October 2, 2000 (65 FR 58640). 
The following correction is needed:

[[Page 70648]]

Sec. 39.13  [Corrected]

    On page 58641, in the second column, in the APPLICABILITY Section, 
the table in the third paragraph from the top of the column,

Eurocopter AS 356 C..................  Eurocopter AS 365 C1.........  Eurocopter AS 350 BA.
Eurocopter AS 356 N2.................  Eurocopter AS 350 B..........  Eurocopter AS 350 B2N.
Eurocopter AS 350 D..................  Eurocopter AS 550 U2.........  Augusta A109K2.
Sikorsky S76A........................  Sikorsky 76A.................  Sikorsky 76A.
Sikorsky S76C''......................
 

is corrected to read ``

Eurocopter SA 365 C;.................  Eurocopter SA 365 C1;........  Eurocopter AS 350 BA;
Eurocopter AS 365 N2;................  Eurocopter AS 350 B;.........  Eurocopter AS 350 B2;
Sikorsky S76C;.......................  Augusta A109K2''.............
 


    Issued in Burlington, MA, on September 21, 2000.
David A. Downey,
Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft 
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 00-28959 Filed 11-24-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
III

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 275

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 29 (legislative day, JULY 20), 1994

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Waiving the requirement in section 132 of the Legislative

Reorganization Act of 1946 that the Congress adjourn

sine die not later than July 31 of each year.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That, notwithstanding the provisions of sec3 tion 132(a)(1) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of

4 1946 (2 U.S.C. 198), the House of Representatives and

5 the Senate shall not adjourn for a period in excess of three

6 days, or adjourn sine die, until both Houses of Congress

7 have adopted a concurrent resolution providing either for

8 an adjournment (in excess of three days) to a day certain

9 or for adjournment sine die.

Passed the House of Representatives July 29, 1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.