alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 02314

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

02314\02314_ CERTIFICATION STATEMENT.pdf Plant certification statement

02314\02314_ HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 02314\02314_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

02314\02314_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

x 02314\02314_Email Correspondence.pdf Email communications regarding questions on the survey response

x 02314\02314_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 02314\02314_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 02314\02314_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 02314\02314_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 02314\02314_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 02314\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\02314_ Ash Handling Schematic.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

02314\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\02314_ COVER LETTER.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 02314\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\02314_ Dry Ash Handling System_est. costs.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

02314\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\02314_ MAP-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 02314\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\02314_ Water Balance WB-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database .
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jamal Marsalis, Appellant.

[770 NYS2d 439]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme *510Court, Kings County (Bárbaro, J.), rendered May 15, 2002, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the exclusion of his fiancée from the courtroom during the suppression hearing infringed his right to a public trial is unpreserved for appellate review *(see People v Jackson,*226 AD2d 476, 477 [1996]), and in any event, is without merit. The hearing court’s decision to exclude the defendant’s fiancée was reached after a bench conference to ascertain the parties’ positions, and was based on the prosecutor’s representation that the People were likely to call the defendant’s fiancée as a witness at the trial. The defendant neither challenged the prosecutor’s good faith nor otherwise objected to the People’s request, and the closure was strictly limited to the defendant’s fiancée. Under the circumstances, we find no infringement of the defendant’s right to a public trial *(see People v Jones,*96 NY2d 213, 217 [2001]; *People v Nevarez,*245 AD2d 173 [1997]; *People v Roundtree,*234 AD2d 58 [1996]).

The defendant’s argument that the evidence was legally insufficient is unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10 [1995]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses *(see People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record *(see People v Garafolo,*44 AD2d 86, 88 [1974]). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]). Altman, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 7176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02564]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Notice of Termination of Receiverships

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as 
Receiver for each of the following insured depository institutions, was 
charged with the duty of winding up the affairs of the former 
institutions and liquidating all related assets. The Receiver has 
fulfilled its obligations and made all dividend distributions required 
by law.

                                     Notice of Termination of Receiverships
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Termination
             Fund                  Receivership name               City                State           date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10248........................  TierOne Bank............  Lincoln................  NE                  02/01/2022
10312........................  Darby Bank and Trust      Vidalia................  GA                  02/01/2022
                                Company.
10537........................  First City Bank of        Fort Walton Beach......  FL                  02/01/2022
                                Florida.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-
Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all 
documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which 
FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary, including but 
not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, 
assignments, and deeds. Effective on the termination dates listed 
above, the Receiverships have been terminated, the Receiver has been 
discharged, and the Receiverships have ceased to exist as legal 
entities.

(Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1819)

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on February 3, 2022.
James P. Sheesley,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-02564 Filed 2-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
NATIONAL EQUITY RECOVERY SERVICES, INC., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. LAW OFFICE OF ANDRE ROUVIERE, et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-0829

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

OCTOBER 05, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Darnez Marquis HERRING v. STATE

CR-15-1047

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
L.W.M. v. STATE

CR-15-0847

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 11.1

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Computation of Per Share Earnings
                                                    For the Twelve Weeks Ended  For the Thirty-six Weeks Ended
                                                    ----------------------------------------------------------
                                                 September 3,     September 5,      September 3,    September 5,
                                                     1996             1995             1996             1995
                                                    -------          -------          -------          -------
                                                    (in thousands, except             (in thousands, except  
                                                        per share amounts)                per share amounts) 
<S>                                                 <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>    
Primary:
Average weighted shares outstanding                  40,611           37,349           38,766           34,290
Net effect of dilutive stock options-based
  on the treasury stock method using
  average market price                                1,039            1,427            1,202            3,067
                                                    -------          -------          -------          -------
Total                                                41,650           38,776           39,967           37,358
                                                    =======          =======          =======          =======

Net Income                                          $15,838          $11,845          $36,878          $30,330
                                                    =======          =======          =======          =======

Per share amount                                    $  0.38          $  0.31          $  0.92          $  0.81
                                                    =======          =======          =======          =======

Fully Diluted:
Average weighted shares outstanding                  40,611           37,349           38,766           34,290
Net effect of dilutive stock options-based
  on the treasury stock method using
  period-end market price, if higher
  than average market price                           1,039            1,464            1,206            3,159
                                                    -------          -------          -------          -------
Total                                                41,650           38,813           39,971           37,450
                                                    =======          =======          =======          =======

Net Income                                          $15,838          $11,845          $36,878          $30,330
                                                    =======          =======          =======          =======

Per share amount                                    $  0.38          $  0.31          $  0.92          $  0.81
                                                    =======          =======          =======          =======
</TABLE>
Cindy HAUSBURG, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Jonathan E. HAUSBURG, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0223

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ON BEHALF OF Laura SULLIVAN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Daniel SULLIVAN, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0638

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 12, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-10526

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Sergio Mendoza-De La Mora, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:21-CR-352-1

______________________________

Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Sergio Mendoza-De La Mora has 

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 

(5th Cir. 2011). Mendoza-De La Mora has not filed a response. We have 

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 2, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-10526 Document: 00516663870 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/02/2023
No. 22-10526

2

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for 

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. 

R. 42.2.

Case: 22-10526 Document: 00516663870 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/02/2023
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Annual Report of Enigma Software Group, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
      M. Scarlata, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that, to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.






/s/
      Richard M. Scarlata





Chief
      Financial Officer


March
      28,
      2008
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2022)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 6759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02626]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 87 , No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2022 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 6759]]

                Presidential Determination No. 2022-09 of February 1, 
                2022

                
Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                By the authority vested in me as President by the 
                Constitution and the laws of the United States of 
                America, including section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and 
                Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (22 U.S.C. 2601(c)(1)) 
                (MRAA), I hereby determine, pursuant to section 2(c)(1) 
                of the MRAA, that it is important to the national 
                interest to furnish assistance under the MRAA in an 
                amount not to exceed $1.2 billion from the United 
                States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund 
                for the purpose of meeting unexpected urgent refugee 
                and migration needs to support Operation Allies Welcome 
                and related efforts by the Department of State, 
                including additional relocations of individuals at risk 
                as a result of the situation in Afghanistan and related 
                expenses. Such assistance may be provided on a 
                bilateral or multilateral basis as appropriate, 
                including through contributions to international 
                organizations and through funding to other 
                nongovernmental organizations, governments, and United 
                States Government agencies.

                You are authorized and directed to submit this 
                determination to the Congress, along with the 
                accompanying Justification, and to publish this 
                determination in the Federal Register.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, February 1, 2022

[FR Doc. 2022-02626
Filed 2-4-22; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4710-10-P
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1423 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1423

 To amend title 1, United States Code, to provide for a definition of 
 the term ``State'' and to include territories therein, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 26, 2021

 Ms. Plaskett introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 1, United States Code, to provide for a definition of 
 the term ``State'' and to include territories therein, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. THE TERM ``STATE'' TO INCLUDE TERRITORIES FOR PURPOSES OF 
              FEDERAL LAW.

    (a) The Term ``State'' To Include Territories.--Chapter 1 of title 
1, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 9. Rule of construction regarding the term `State'
    ``In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any 
ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative 
bureaus and agencies of the United States, the term `State' shall 
include any territory of the United States, unless the statute, rule, 
regulation, or interpretation explicitly excludes the territories from 
the definition of the term or otherwise precludes their inclusion.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such chapter is 
amended by adding at the end the following:

``9. Rule of construction regarding the term `State'.''.
                                 <all>
```
SHANE COREY GRIFFIN

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 3195

____ _________________________/

Opinion filed November 3, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. Mark W. Moseley , Judge

.

Shane Corey Griffin , pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, OSTERHAUS, AND WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                              CYTRX CORPORATION
                      COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE
             FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996, 1995 AND 1994





<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                            1996                     1995                   1994
                                                        -----------             ------------           -----------
<S>                                                     <C>                     <C>                    <C>
COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE - PRIMARY
Net loss                                                $(5,791,779)            $(10,652,582)          $(7,700,186)
                                                        ===========             ============           ===========
Average number of common shares outstanding               7,737,949                7,905,364             7,893,962
Common shares issuable assuming exercise of
        stock options and warrants  (1)                           0                        0                     0
                                                        -----------              ------------           -----------
Total shares                                             7,737,949                 7,905,364             7,893,962
                                                        ===========             ============           ===========
Net loss per share                                      $    (0.75)             $      (1.35)          $     (0.98)
                                                        ===========             ============           ===========


COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE - FULLY DILUTED
Net loss                                                $(5,791,779)            $(10,652,582)          $(7,700,186)
                                                        ===========             ============           ===========
Average number of common shares outstanding               7,737,949                7,905,364             7,893,962
Common shares issuable assuming exercise of
        stock options and warrants  (1)                           0                        0                     0
                                                        -----------              ------------           -----------
Total shares                                              7,737,949                7,905,364             7,893,962
                                                        ===========             ============           ===========
Net loss per share                                     $      (0.75)            $      (1.35)          $     (0.98)
                                                        ===========             ============           ===========
</TABLE>



(1)     Stock options and warrants outstanding are excluded from the
        computation of net loss per share since their effect would be
        anti-dilutive.


All per share data has been retroactively restated to reflect a 1-for-4 reverse
stock split in February 1996.
Kelly MOSLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-0283

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 12, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
STATE of Louisiana v. Mark HALL

No. 2017-KP-0832

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 25, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Relator has failed to show the state withheld material exculpatory evidence in violation of *Brady v. Maryland* , 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2.

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher READ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11199

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

September 28, 2017

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Kevin Joel Page, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, Peter Michael Fleury, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Christopher Read pled guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance. On appeal, he argues the district court made a clearly erroneous factual finding regarding other criminal conduct and then relied on it for purposes of sentencing. We find no evidence that the district court made such a factual finding, but even if it did, it would have been harmless error. AFFIRMED.

*

 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.