alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
~~- S l Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps 

# MANUFACTURER IMPACT ANALYSIS Mark Kendall (kendall.mark@adlittle.com) Arthur D. Little, Inc. U.S. DOE Workshop on Standards for Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps September 12, 2001 • I Commercial Air Conditioners and HeatPumps 

# MANUFACTURER IMPACT ANALYSIS Mark Kendall (kendall.mark@adlittle.com) Arthur D. Little, Inc. U.S. DOE Workshop on Standards for Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps September 12, 2001

### S:* Manufacturer Impact Analysis To explore the economic and competitive issues, the Manufacturer Impact Analysis (MIA) asks several questions. · What impacts willstandards have on... - Industry cash flows and netpresent value? - Product flow through distribution channels? - Manufacturing capacity? - Industry employment levels?
- Competition? 

### * Whatproducts orsubgroups may be particularlysensitive to impacts of new standards? * What otherregulations contribute to a cumulative regulatory burden on manufacturers, and what is theircombined impact? * Should the Department consider other topics beside competition, employment, capacity utilization and cumulative burden? 1 Manufacturer Impact Analysis

. '. Ioj:." ",,1: To expl'ore the economic and competitive issues, the Manufacturer Impact Analysis (MIA) asks several questions. • What impacts will standards have on... - Industiy cash flows andnetpresent value?
- Product flow through distribution channels?
- Manufacturing capacity?
- Industry employmentlevels?
- Competition? • Whatproducts orsubgroups maybe particularlysensitive to impacts of newstandards? • What otherregulations contribute to a cumulative regulatory burden on manufacturers, and what is'theircombined impact? • Should the Department considerother topics beside competition, employment, capacity utilization and cumulative burden? 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 98-4195 DAVID EARL HARVEY, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-97-469) Submitted: September 22, 1998 Decided: November 19, 1998 Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Benjamin T. Stepp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. David Calhoun Stephens, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION PER CURIAM: David Earl Harvey appeals from his conviction and sentence for violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1014 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). Harvey's attorney has filed a brief citing Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738(1967), stating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but discussing the district court's Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 inquiry and its application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Harvey was informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but failed to file one. Harvey does not allege any specific defect in the Rule 11 inquiry, and we find none. The court insured that Harvey understood the charges against him and the nature of his guilty plea. The court also advised Harvey about the rights he was waiving and the potential punishments he f aced. Finally, Harvey informed the court that he was satisfied with the performance of counsel, and he stated that he was knowingly and willfully pleading guilty. We therefore find that the trial court's inquiry satisfied the requirements of Rule 11. See United States v. DeFusco , 949 F.2d 114 (4th Cir. 1991).Harvey likewise does not allege any specific error in the calculation of his sentencing range, and we do not find any. Moreover, this court lacks authority to review correctly calculated sentences falling within the appropriate statutory or Guidelines ranges. See United States v. Porter , 909 F.2d 789, 794 (4th Cir. 1990). Pursuant to the requirements of Anders , we have reviewed the entire record for potential error and have found none. Accordingly, we affirm Harvey's conviction and sentence. This Court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move this Court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client.
AFFIRMED
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

KEVIN JONES, §

#1169005 §

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § No. 3:22-cv-1882-B (BT)

§

R. BOWERS, et al., § 

Defendants. §

ORDER

The United States Magistrate Judge issued findings, conclusions and a recommendation in this

case. The District Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the proposed findings and

recommendation to which objection was made. Any objections are overruled, and the Court

ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

Signed this 23 day of September, 2022. rd

_________________________________

JANE J. BOYLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-01882-B-BT Document 6 Filed 09/23/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 27
Matter Expense Report

Description Amount

ABC Legal Service Fee $129.00

Service Fee to ABC Legal Services $129.00

Attempted Service Fee to ABC Legal $81.50

Service Fee to ABC Legal $129.00

Filing Fee $402.00

Total $870.50

8/11/2022

Date

12/15/2022

11/14/2022

10/12/2022

10/11/2022

Case 3:22-cv-01751-S Document 28-5 Filed 08/30/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 125
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 159 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 159

   To designate the month of November in 1993 and 1994 as ``National 
                            Hospice Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 18, 1993

Mr. Gejdenson (for himself, Mrs. Kennelly, Mr. DeLauro, Mr. Shays, Mrs. 
 Johnson of Connecticut, and Mr. Franks of Connecticut) introduced the 
following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Post 
                        Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
   To designate the month of November in 1993 and 1994 as ``National 
                            Hospice Month''.

Whereas hospice care has been demonstrated to be a humanitarian way for 
        terminally ill patients to approach the end of their lives in comfort 
        with appropriate, competent, and compassionate care in an environment of 
        personal individuality and dignity;
Whereas hospice advocates care for the patient and family by attending to their 
        physical, emotional, and spiritual needs and specifically, the pain and 
        grief they experience;
Whereas hospice care is provided by an interdisciplinary team of physicians, 
        nurses, social workers, pharmacists, psychological and spiritual 
        counselors, and community volunteers trained in the hospice concept of 
        care;
Whereas hospice has become a full partner in the Nation's health care system;
Whereas the enactment of a permanent medicare hospice benefit and an optional 
        medicaid hospice benefit makes it possible for many more Americans to 
        have the opportunity to elect to receive hospice care;
Whereas private insurance carriers and employers have recognized the value of 
        hospice care by the inclusion of hospice benefits in health care 
        coverage packages; and
Whereas there remains a great need to increase public awareness of the benefits 
        of hospice care: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the month of November in 
1993 and 1994 is designated as ``National Hospice Month''. The 
President is requested to issue a proclamation calling upon all 
government agencies, the health care community, appropriate private 
organizations, and people of the United States to observe each of those 
months with appropriate forums, programs and activities designed to 
encourage national recognition of and support for hospice care as a 
humane response to the needs of the terminally ill and as a viable 
component of the health care system in this country.

                                 <all>
```
IA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 351

Designating May 22 through May 28, 1994, as ‘‘In Celebration of America

Week’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 13, 1994

Mr. CALVERT introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating May 22 through May 28, 1994, as ‘‘In

Celebration of America Week’’.

Whereas the purpose of the designation made by this joint

resolution is to promote among students a conscious and

constructive understanding that America is made up of

people from diverse ethnic, racial, cultural, linguistic, and

religious backgrounds, yet are united as Americans by

the ideals and principles of democracy that are contained

in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights and

the Declaration of Independence;

Whereas the week’s activities should build toward the observance of Memorial Day, honoring Americans of all back-
2

•HJ 351 IH

grounds who gave their lives so that future generations

could enjoy the blessings of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution; and

Whereas it is intended that this week of celebration include

activities at each school site that reflect this theme, utilize district and community resources, and are incorporated into the social studies curriculum: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That May 22 through 28, 1994, is designated as ‘‘In Cele4 bration of America Week’’, and the President is author5 ized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon

6 the people of the United States to observe such week with

7 appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Æ
----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 11 November 2004

in Case C-171/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven): Maatschap Toeters, M.C. Verberk v Productschap Vee en Vlees (1)

(Beef and veal - Early marketing premium for calves - Time-limit for lodging premium applications - Rules for calculating time-limit - Validity of Regulation (EEC) No 3886/92)

(2005/C 6/23)

Language of the case: Dutch

In Case C-171/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands), made by decision of 13 April 2003, received at the Court on 14 April 2003, in the proceedings between Maatschap Toeters, M.C. Verberk, trading as ‘Verberk-Voeten’, and Productschap Vee en Vlees — the Court (First Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber, A. Rosas (Rapporteur) and R. Silva de Lapuerta, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 11 November 2004, in which it has ruled:

----

(1)OJ C 146 of 21.6.2003.

----
# Official Journal C 183/20 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 183 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5920 May 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 183

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5920 May 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 183/1 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 183/1

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 10.1


 


 


 



EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES












THIS EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES ("Extension") to the Agreement for Services dated November 12, 2014 ("Agreement ") by and between PetroShare Corp., a Colorado corporation ("Company ") and Kingdom Resources, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("Contractor") is made effective the 2 day of September, 2015 ("Effective Date"). Company and Contractor may be referred to individuality as a "Party" or collectively as the "Parties."







WHEREAS, the purpose of the Agreement was to set forth the terms under which Contractor shall perform services for Company acquiring oil and gas interests and the consideration paid by Company for the services of Contractor;







WHEREAS, the Parties agreed that the term of the Agreement would expire on December 31, 2015 ("Agreement Termination Date");







WHEREAS , the Parties desire to extend the term of the Agreement for a period of two years from the Agreement Termination Date as set forth in this Extension; and







WHEREAS, capitalized terms as used herein shall have the meanings defined in the Agreement, unless otherwise defined herein.







NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the mutual promises, obligations and agreements of the Parties, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which hereby are acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:







1.         The Term of the Agreement shall be extended two years from the Agreement Termination Date and shall expire on December 31, 2017.







2.         Except as expressly set forth in this Extension, the Agreement shall remain unaltered and in full force and effect according to the terms and conditions thereof, and the execution of this Extension shall not constitute a waiver of any of the Parties' rights under the Agreement. All recitals set forth above are incorporated herein by this reference.







3.         This Extension may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all such counterparts shall constitute one instrument.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Extension to be effective as of the Effective Date first above written.


 



	

PETROSHARE CORP.












/s/ Stephen J. Foley                                                      


Stephen J. Foley, CEO



	

KINGDOM RESOURCES, LLC


 







/s/ Gene Osborne  


Gene Osborne, Manager
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § 2:22-CR-00055-Z-BR

§

JOSE ANTONIO SANCHEZ (2) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

JOSE ANTONIO SANCHEZ (2), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 

1997), has appeared before me pursuant to FED.R.CRIM. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Superseding 

Information. After cautioning and examining JOSE ANTONIO SANCHEZ (2) under oath concerning each of the subjects 

mentioned in Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense 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 JOSE ANTONIO SANCHEZ (2) be adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) 

and 841(b)(1)(D) - POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE MARIHUANA 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. § 3143(a)(1) 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 

if released.

☒ The Government 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 Government 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 18 U.S.C. § 3143(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 (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown 

under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) 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 if released.

Date: August 31, 2022

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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(b)(1)(B).

Case 2:22-cr-00055-Z-BR Document 63 Filed 08/31/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 147
#### ROLLINS v. STATE.

No. 21779.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 10, 1941.

Harvey P. Shead, of Longview, for appellant.

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

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of negligent homicide in the first degree, and his punishment assessed at thirty days imprisonment jn the county jail.

*526The indictment appears regular. The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. No question is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
(logo)WELLS FARGO**           Commercial Mortgage Servicing**

   D1050-084, 8th Floor 

   401 South Tryon Street 

   Charlotte, NC 28202

   1-800-326-1334

 

 

**ANNUALSTATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

** **

Reference is hereby made to that certainPooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 2015, by and among MorganStanley Capital I Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association,as Master Servicer, LNR Partners, LLC, as General Special Servicer, Wells FargoBank, National Association, as Excluded Mortgage Loan Special Servicer,Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Trust Advisor, Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation, as Trustee, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asCertificate Administrator, Certificate Registrar, Authenticating Agent andCustodian with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series2015-C23 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein nototherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Agreement,I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services dohereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activities of theMaster Servicer during the period from January 1, 2017 through December 31,2017 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement duringsuch period has been made under my supervision,and

 

2.To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the ReportingPeriod.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hasexecuted this Certificate as of the 28th day ofFebruary2018.

 

/s/Daniel Bober  

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President 

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

WellsFargo Bank,N.A.                                                                        (logo)Together we’ll go far
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BLACKHAWK MANUFACTURING 

GROUP INC., et al., 

Intervenor Plaintiffs, 

v. 

MERRICK GARLAND, in his Official 

capacity as Attorney General of the 

United States, et al.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00691-O

ORDER

Before the Court are Putative-Intervenors (1) Not an LLC d/b/a JSD Supply’s Motion to 

Intervene (ECF No. 149), filed January 5, 2023; (2) Polymer80, Inc.’s Motion to Intervene (ECF 

No. 157), filed January 9, 2023; and (3) Polymer80, Inc.’s Motion for Expedited Briefing 

Scheduling (ECF No. 160), filed January 9, 2023. To expedite resolution of the motions, the Court

ORDERS Defendants to respond to Putative Intervenors’ motions to intervene no later than 

January 23, 2023. Plaintiffs may respond, if they choose, no later than January 23, 2023. 

Putative-Intervenors may reply no later than January 27, 2023. Putative-Intervenor Polymer80’s 

motion to expedite is therefore GRANTED in part (ECF No. 160). 

SO ORDERED this 17th day of January, 2023. 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 169 Filed 01/17/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 3074