alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Joe TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 21749.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 15, 1941.

Tom M. Miller, of Graham, for appellant.

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

GRAVES, Judge.

Upon appellant’s plea of guilty of the offense of theft of property over the value *1007of $50, and the waiver of a trial by jury, the court assessed his penalty at two years confinement in the penitentiary.

The appellant has filed a written application, duly verified by his affidavit, requesting the privilege of withdrawing his appeal. The request is granted and the appeal is ordered dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          2,178,289
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         320
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                2,178,609
<PP&E>                                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  2,178,609
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               2,000
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                     2,875,000
<COMMON>                                       17,062,272
<OTHER-SE>                                    (17,760,663)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    2,178,609
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        0
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      13,758
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    11,017
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                11,017
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                       11,017
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0.00



</TABLE>
STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND
                           PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS

                       American Radio Systems Corporation

                                   EXHIBIT 12

         The following  table reflects the  computation of the ratio of earnings
to fixed charges and preferred  stock  dividends  for the years  indicated.  (In
thousands, except ratio data)


                                                    Three Months    Three Months
                                                    Ended March     Ended March
                                                      31, 1997        31, 1998
                                                    ------------    ------------
Computation of Earnings:
Loss from continuing operations before
   extraordinary loss and income taxes              $ (4,410)        $(18,432) 
                                                                    
Add:                                                                
Interest expense (1)                                   7,504           19,013
Rent expense (2)                                         494            1,213
                                                    --------         --------
Earnings as adjusted                                   3,588            1,794
                                                    ========         ========
Computation of Fixed Charges:                                       
Interest expense (1)                                   7,504           19,013
Rent expense (2)                                         494            1,213
Preferred dividends (3)                                6,198            8,394
                                                    --------         --------
Fixed charges                                         14,196           28,620
                                                    ========         ========
                                                                    
Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and                     
   Preferred Stock Dividends                            --               --
                                                                    
Deficiency in earnings required to cover combined                   
   fixed charges and Preferred Stock                                
   Dividends                                          10,608           26,826
                                                               


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

(1)  Interest expense includes amortization of deferred financing costs.
(2)  The  interest  element  of  rent  expense  is  assumed  to be 30% of  gross
     operating rent charges.
(3)  Includes dividends on redeemable common and preferred stock.
The Right to Health: Fundamental Concepts and 

The American Disability Experience—Quick Reference Guide 

National Council on Disability 

1331 F Street, NW, Suite 850 

Washington, DC 20004 

202-272-2004 Voice 

202-272-2074 TTY 

202-272-2022 Fax 

Lex Frieden, Chairperson 

Publication date: August 2, 2005 

This paper provides examples of US policies and programs designed and implemented to 

support the right of people with disabilities to enjoy the highest attainable standard of 

health. A more detailed description is provided in the attached policy paper. 

Freedom of Choice, Personal Autonomy 

• The Olmstead decision, handed down by the United States Supreme Court in 1999, 

clarifies that requiring people with disabilities to live in institutions in order to access 

services constitutes illegal discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

The Olmstead decision requires public entities to provide services and conduct 

activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified 

individuals with disabilities.". 

• Executive Order 13217, issued by President Bush in 2001, implements the mandate of 

the Olmstead decision. 

• The Medicaid Community Attendant Services and Supports Act (MiCASSA) would 

require services be provided in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of 

the individual. MiCASSA has not yet been passed by Congress. 

Equality and Non-Discrimination in Health Care: Ensuring Access and Eliminating 

Disparities in Quality of Care 

• The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in 

all programs conducted by federal agencies or by organizations receiving federal 

financial assistance. 

• The ADA, enacted in 1990, is a far-reaching piece of legislation developed in an 

effort to entrench the principles of non-discrimination in a broad range of areas across 

American society. The anti-discrimination protections provided by ADA extend to 

health care providers in both private and public sectors, in hospitals and in doctors’ 

offices. 
• The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) and the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conduct comprehensive and coordinated 

programs of research and development, including many efforts that focus on 

accessibility of health care for people with disabilities. 

Public Health Strategies: Including People with Disabilities as part of a Healthy 

and Prosperous Nation 

• The Healthy People initiative is an important public health program in the United 

States. Healthy People is a comprehensive health plan that is developed for 

implementation over a ten-year period and subject to extensive annual progress 

reviews throughout the course of the decade. Beginning with the 2000 – 2010 

decade, people with disabilities have been targeted in this critical national strategic 

plan. Healthy People 2010 takes a holistic approach to promoting the physical, 

mental, economic and social health of people with disabilities.
BTXN 138 (rev. 03/15)

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

In Re: §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Yuma Energy, Inc.

Debtor(s)

 Case No.: 20−41455−mxm7

 Chapter No.: 7

Laurie Rea, Chapter 7 Trustee of Yuma Energy, Inc.

and The Yuma Companies, Inc. 

Plaintiff(s) Adversary No.: 22−04022−mxm

 vs.

Red Mountain Capital Partners, LLC et al. Civil Case No.: 4:22−cv−565−O

Defendant(s)

Laurie Rea, Chapter 7 Trustee of Yuma Energy, Inc.

and The Yuma Companies, Inc.

Plaintiff(s)

 vs.

Red Mountain Capital Partners, LLC et al.

Defendant(s)

NOTICE OF TRANSMITTAL REGARDING WITHDRAWAL OF REFERENCE

I am transmitting:

One copy of the Motion to Withdraw Reference (USDC Civil Action No. − DNC Case) NOTE:

A Status Conference has been set for at , in before U.S. Bankruptcy Judge . The

movant/plaintiff, respondent/defendant or other affected parties are required to attend the Status

Conference.

One copy of: Report and recommendation to the US District Court .

TO ALL ATTORNEYS: Fed.R.Bankr.P. 5011(a) A motion for withdrawal of a case or proceeding shall be heard by

a district judge, [implied] that any responses or related papers be filed likewise.

DATED: 8/12/22 FOR THE COURT:

Robert P. Colwell, Clerk of Court

by: /s/Jeanette Almaraz, Deputy Clerk

Case 22-04022-mxm Doc 80 Filed 08/12/22 Entered 08/12/22 10:08:23 Page 1 of 1

Case 4:22-cv-00565-O Document 10 Filed 08/12/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 53
# Official Journal C 111A/6 Ma

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 111A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 516 May 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 111A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 516 May 2008

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2008/C 111A/01 | Reserve list — Open competition EPSO/AST/42/07 — Assistants (AST1) having as their main language Irish (GA) in the secretarial field | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2008/C 111A/01

Reserve list — Open competition EPSO/AST/42/07 — Assistants (AST1) having as their main language Irish (GA) in the secretarial field

1

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

EN

---

V Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

| 6.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 111/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 111/1

---

RESERVE LIST

   (1)

OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/AST/42/07

ASSISTANTS (AST1)

HAVING AS THEIR MAIN LANGUAGE IRISH (GA)

IN THE SECRETARIAL FIELD

(2008/C 111 A/01)

| DE BURCA | Caitriona |
| --- | --- |
| MC CULLOUGH | Patrick |
| MEEHAN | Sinead |
| MUNDOW | Niamh |
| NI CHONGHAILE (VESELAJ) | Noirin |
| O DOHERTY | Rachel |

DE BURCA

Caitriona

MC CULLOUGH

Patrick

MEEHAN

Sinead

MUNDOW

Niamh

NI CHONGHAILE (VESELAJ)

Noirin

O DOHERTY

Rachel

The reserve list will be valid until 31 December 2009 and may be extended.

---

(1)  A successful candidate may explicitly request her/his name not be published.

---
Order entered November 29 , 2017

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 17

- 00238

- CR

JOSE EDUARDO GUERRER O, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the C riminal District Court No. 6

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F 15

- 75211

- X



### O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s November 22, 2017 motion to extend time to file

appellant’s brief. We GRANT the motion to the extent that appellant’s brief shall be filed within

thirty days from the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

May 27, 2015

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Tractor Tire Rolling Resistance Data Evaluation

FROM: Angela Cullen, Director of Data and Testing, OTAQ/ASD

TO: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Mediumand Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles - Phase 2 - Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-

0827

Introduction

This memorandum presents available information on the range of coefficients of rolling 

resistance (CRR) of tires that are manufactured for tractor applications. These were identified by 

the manufacturer’s description of intended vehicle application specified when the tire was

obtained for testing and the data submitted by manufacturers for certification. Tires with 

applications listed exclusively as “line haul” or “long haul” are presented here. Tires with 

applications that included “trailer”, “bucket truck”, “bus”, “city delivery”, “construction”, “high 

scrub”, “intercity coach”, “local P&D”, “mixed service”, “on/off road”, “on/off highway”,

“regional”, “RV”, “refuse”, “school bus”, “short haul,” and “special service” have all been 

excluded from this analysis. 

The tire CRR presented in this memorandum are based on data obtained by 

manufacturers between February 2012 and December 2013 and reported to NHTSA and EPA.

For a variety of reasons, including questions about representativeness of the tire test data 

and unknown sales volumes, the agencies have not predicated the Phase 2 tractor standards on 

future market adoption rates that align with these tire CRR distributions, though the proposed 

standards are informed by these distributions. In addition, this data was not used to determine 

the baseline CRR of the existing fleet because of the lack of sales volume information. The 

purpose of presenting this data is to demonstrate that there is a wide range of CRR on tires that 

are commercially available for use on tractors.
2

Data Summary

In Figure 1, the minimum CRR of the set of steer or all-position tires intended for tractor

applications is 4.3 kg/metric ton. The steer tires had an average CRR of 6.2 kg/metric ton.

Figure 1: Steer Tire Rolling Resistance

In Figure 2, the minimum CRR of the set of drive position tires intended for tractor

applications is 5.0 kg/metric ton. The drive tires had an average CRR of 7.4 kg/metric ton.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 Coefficient of Rolling Resistance (kg/metric ton)

2014 MY Steer Tire Rolling Resistance for Tractors
3

Figure 2: Drive Tire Rolling Resistance

0

2

4

6

8

1 0

1 2

0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 100 120 140 160 Coefficient of Rolling Resistance (kg/metric ton)

2014 MY Drive Tire Rolling Resistance for Tractors
(logo) pwc

 

 

**Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

 

To the Board of Directors, PNCFinancial Services Group, Inc.:

 

We have examinedmanagement’s assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessmentof Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that Midland LoanServices, a division of PNC Bank, National Association (“Midland”or the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth inItem 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for alltransactions serviced on the *Enterprise!* Loan Management System (the“Platform”), as of December 31, 2016 and for the year then ended,excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(i)(B), 1122(d)(3)(i)(C),1122(d)(3)(i)(D), 1122(d)(3)(ii), 1122(d)(3)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(iv), and1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to theservicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Managementis responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Ourresponsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on ourexamination.

 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicableservicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessaryin the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected asset-backedtransactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selectedservicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether theCompany processed those selected transactions and performed those selectedactivities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedureswere limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed bythe Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were notdesigned to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurredprior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances oramounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by thisreport. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for ouropinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on theCompany’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that Midland complied with the aforementionedapplicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

February 17, 2017

 

 

*PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP,1100 Walnut Street, Suite 1300, Kansas City, MO 64106*

*T: (816) 472 7921, F: (816)218 1890 www.pwc.com/us*

* *
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 183

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to allow

an item veto of appropriation bills.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 22, 1993

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

the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States to allow an item veto of appropriation bills.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow4 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu5 tion of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents

6 and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by

7 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States with-
2

•HJ 183 IH

1 in seven years after the date of its submission for ratifica2 tion:

3 ‘‘ARTICLE —

4 ‘‘The President may disapprove any item of appro5 priation in any bill. If any bill is approved by the Presi6 dent, any item of appropriation contained therein which

7 is not disapproved shall become law. The President shall

8 return with his objections any item of appropriation dis9 approved to the House in which the bill containing such

10 item originated. The Congress may, in the manner pre11 scribed under section 7 of article I for bills disapproved

12 by the President, reconsider any item disapproved under

13 this article.’’.

Æ
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1266

To provide permanent duty-free treatment for certain menthol feedstocks.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 9, 1993

Mr. RAVENEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To provide permanent duty-free treatment for certain

menthol feedstocks.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN MENTHOL FEEDSTOCKS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 29 of the Harmonized

5 Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by insert6 ing after subheading 2906.14.00 the following new

7 subheading, with the article description having the same

8 degree of indentation as the article description in sub9 heading 2906.19.00:
2

•HR 1266 IH

‘‘ 2906.16.00 Mixtures containing not less than 90

percent by weight of stereoisomers of

2-isopropyl-5-methyl-cyclohexanol, but

containing not more than 30 percent

by weight of any 1 such stereoisomer .. Free Free

(A,E,IL)

2.8% (CA)

45%

’’.

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Chapter 99 of the

2 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

3 amended by striking subheading 9902.29.05.

4 SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.

5 The amendments made by section 1 apply with re6 spect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for

7 consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of

8 the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,195
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  137,234
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               138,429
<PP&E>                                       7,174,936
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,516,666
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,796,699
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,723
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,796,699
<SALES>                                        628,019
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               631,085
<CGS>                                          138,200
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  491,129
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                139,956
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            139,956
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   139,956
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.22


 


Supplemental Processing Agreement


 


	Client (hereafter “Party A”):	Henan Jianyida Industrial Co., Ltd.
	 	 
	Contractor (hereafter “Party B”):	Zhongping Energy & Chemical Group Hongrui New Construction Materials Co., Ltd.


 


Based on negotiations, the parties hereby supplement
the Processing Agreement they entered into on January 8, 2011, as follows:


 


		1.	On the basis of the above referenced Processing Agreement, the term is extended for one year from
March 1, 2015 to March 1, 2016.



 


		2.	All other terms of the Processing Agreement shall remain in effect from the execution of this Supplemental
Agreement.



 


		3.	This Agreement is executed into two original duplicates. This Agreement shall take effect upon
execution of authorized representatives of the parties. Each party shall retain one duplicate.



 


		4.	The parties shall negotiate to resolve any unsettled matters.



 


	Party A: [Seal] 	 	Party B: [Seal]
	Signature: /s/ Hui Li	 	Signature: /s/ Qimin Cheng
	Date: February 25, 2015 	 	Date: February 25, 2015